Let me know if this is acceptable.
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Mike Dupont
<jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Attached a dirty patch to disable the broken printf max string length
> code. I dont expect it to be merged but it might be a starting point
> for someone experiencing the problem that I have.
>
> Take a look at _doprnt from libiberty for an implementation. I am
> wondering why we need these lengths in the parameters anyway? I would
> like the raw data so.
> It might be interesting to show the result of the format string applied.
>
> see my bug report here:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=804494
>
> any feedback would be appreciated.
>
> mike
>
> --
> James Michael DuPont
> Kansas Linux Fest http://kansaslinuxfest.us
> Free/Libre Open Source and Open Knowledge Association of Kansas
> http://openkansas.us
> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://www.flossk.org
> Saving Wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
--
James Michael DuPont
Kansas Linux Fest http://kansaslinuxfest.us
Free/Libre Open Source and Open Knowledge Association of Kansas
http://openkansas.us
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://www.flossk.org
Saving Wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
Index: ltrace-0.7.3/printf.c
===================================================================
--- ltrace-0.7.3.orig/printf.c
+++ ltrace-0.7.3/printf.c
@@ -97,8 +97,8 @@ drop_future_length(struct param_enum *se
static int
form_next_param(struct param_enum *self,
enum arg_type format_type, enum arg_type elt_type,
- unsigned hlf, unsigned lng, char *len_buf, size_t len_buf_len,
+ unsigned hlf, unsigned lng,
struct arg_type_info *infop)
{
/* XXX note: Some types are wrong because we lack
ARGTYPE_LONGLONG, ARGTYPE_UCHAR and ARGTYPE_SCHAR. */
@@ -130,38 +130,5 @@ form_next_param(struct param_enum *self,
struct expr_node *node = NULL;
int own_node;
- if (len_buf_len != 0
- || self->future_length != NULL) {
- struct tmp {
- struct expr_node node;
- struct arg_type_info type;
- };
- struct tmp *len = malloc(sizeof(*len));
- if (len == NULL) {
- fail:
- free(len);
- free(array);
- return -1;
- }
-
- len->type = *type_get_simple(ARGTYPE_LONG);
-
- long l;
- if (self->future_length != NULL) {
- l = *self->future_length;
- drop_future_length(self);
- } else {
- l = atol(len_buf);
- }
-
- expr_init_const_word(&len->node, l, &len->type, 0);
-
- node = build_zero_w_arg(&len->node, 1);
- if (node == NULL)
- goto fail;
- own_node = 1;
-
- } else {
- node = expr_node_zero();
- own_node = 0;
- }
+ node = expr_node_zero();
+ own_node = 0;
assert(node != NULL);
type_init_array(array, elt_info, 0, node, own_node);
@@ -188,8 +183,6 @@ param_printf_next(struct param_enum *sel
unsigned lng = 0;
enum arg_type format_type = ARGTYPE_VOID;
enum arg_type elt_type = ARGTYPE_VOID;
- char len_buf[25] = {};
- size_t len_buf_len = 0;
struct lens *lens = NULL;
for (; self->ptr < self->end; ++self->ptr) {
@@ -207,8 +202,8 @@ param_printf_next(struct param_enum *sel
continue;
case '*':
- /* Length parameter given in the next
- * argument. */
+ /* Min or max Length parameter given in the next
+ * argument depending on position. */
if (self->future_length == NULL)
/* This should really be an assert,
* but we can't just fail on invalid
@@ -229,8 +224,6 @@ param_printf_next(struct param_enum *sel
/* Field length likewise, but we need to parse
* this to attach the appropriate string
* length expression. */
- if (len_buf_len < sizeof(len_buf) - 1)
- len_buf[len_buf_len++] = *self->ptr;
continue;
case 'h':
@@ -329,7 +324,7 @@ param_printf_next(struct param_enum *sel
assert(format_type != ARGTYPE_VOID);
if (form_next_param(self, format_type, elt_type, hlf, lng,
- len_buf, len_buf_len, infop) < 0)
+ infop) < 0)
return -1;
infop->lens = lens;
