On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 07:30:45AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/11/2017 05:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > Instead of requiring use of another Buffer, pass a struct iovec
> > into qio_channel_websock_encode, which gives callers more
> > flexibility in how they process data.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com>
>
> > +static void qio_channel_websock_encode(QIOChannelWebsock *ioc,
> > + uint8_t opcode,
> > + const struct iovec *iov,
> > + size_t niov,
> > + size_t size)
> > {
> > size_t header_size;
> > + size_t i;
> > union {
> > char buf[QIO_CHANNEL_WEBSOCK_HEADER_LEN_64_BIT];
> > QIOChannelWebsockHeader ws;
>
> Is it worth adding assert(size <= iov_size(iov, niov)) near the top,
>
> > + trace_qio_channel_websock_encode(ioc, opcode, header_size, size);
> > + buffer_reserve(&ioc->encoutput, header_size + size);
> > + buffer_append(&ioc->encoutput, header.buf, header_size);
> > + for (i = 0; i < niov && size != 0; i++) {
> > + size_t want = iov[i].iov_len;
> > + if (want > size) {
> > + want = size;
> > + }
> > + buffer_append(&ioc->encoutput, iov[i].iov_base, want);
> > + size -= want;
> > + }
>
> so we don't have to worry about a huge size causing us to buffer_reserve
> far too much space?
Sure, I can add that.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
