Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:21:03 -0600 From: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: perhaps we should add re[c]allocarray? Hello, On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 2:40:53 PM MDT you wrote: > 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. Okay great. I will work on reallocarray() first and then follow up with recallocarray(). Ariadne
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.