On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 09:32:54AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
...
> > Note: Ingo Molnar has some concerns about the comment being out of sync
> > [1] but I believe the comment still has a place as we can still
> > theoretically copy 64 bytes into our destination buffer without a
> > NUL-byte. The extra information about the 65th byte being NUL may serve
> > helpful to future travelers of this code. What do we think? I can drop
> > the comment in a v3 if needed.
>
> > /* VMM assumes '\0' in byte 65, if the message took all 64 bytes */
> > - strncpy(message.str, msg, 64);
> > + strtomem_pad(message.str, msg, '\0');
>
> My concern was that with the old code it was obvious that the size
> of message.str was 64 bytes - but I judged this based on the
> patch context alone, which seemingly lost context due to the change.
>
> In reality it's easy to see it when reading the code, because the
> length definition is right before the code:
>
> union {
> /* Define register order according to the GHCI */
> struct { u64 r14, r15, rbx, rdi, rsi, r8, r9, rdx; };
>
> char str[64];
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> } message;
>
> /* VMM assumes '\0' in byte 65, if the message took all 64 bytes */
> strtomem_pad(message.str, msg, '\0');
This comment and size of union seems not in agreement.
How does the previous code work if message indeed takes 64 bytes?
By luck?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
