> On Mar 14, 2026, at 01:59, Jacob Champion <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 12:24 AM Jonathan Gonzalez V.
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> While rebasing this patch[1] I notice that the test where wailing, that
>> was due to the following missing dependency in the test, small patch
>> here:
>
> Fixed in v8, thanks.
>
> v7-0001 and -0002 are committed, plus the removal of some additional
> typedefs, plus a fix for a silly bug in the Makefile that indri
> caught.
>
> --Jacob
> <since-v7.diff.txt><v8-0001-libpq-Poison-the-v2-part-of-a-v1-Bearer-request.patch><v8-0002-libpq-Allow-developers-to-reimplement-libpq-oauth.patch><v8-0003-WIP-Introduce-third-party-OAuth-flow-plugins.patch>
Hi Jacob, a few comments on v8.
1 - 0001
```
+ /*
+ * For uninstrumented builds, make sure request->error wasn't
touched.
+ */
+ if (request->error)
+ {
+ fprintf(stderr,
+ "abort! out-of-bounds write to
PGoauthBearerRequest by PQAUTHDATA_OAUTH_BEARER_TOKEN hook\n");
+ abort();
+ }
```
I think this check relies on that when poisoning, request->error should be
NULL. So, does it make sense to Assert(request->error==NULL) in the poison
branch?
2 - 0002 Overall LGTM. A small comment is that, now use_builtin_flow() becomes
a bit misleading because it may turn to non-builtin when libpq_oauth_init is
not provided by the lib. So, maybe rename the function to something like
try_builtin_flow()?
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
