Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:40:53 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de> Cc: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: perhaps we should add re[c]allocarray? On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 08:58:04PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > > recallocarray presumably needs to zero the new part which means it > > needs to know the old exact size, which means it depends on having > > either knowledge of implementation internals or a working, exact > > malloc_usable_size (AFAIK all legacy/existing ones except musl > > mallocng are broken and return a value greater than the originally > > allocated size). > > The caller has to pass the old member count to recallocarray, in an > additional argument. I think this avoids this particular issue, and > also makes it easy to achive interposition-safety. Ah, great, that makes it a non-issue then, and in that case I have no significant objections to it. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.