> On a second thought, NAK. There are too many redundant checks in the code as
> it is, and adding these kind of just-in-case checks doesn't do anything to
> help spot the actually crucial missing ones. Forest from the trees, you know.
>
> If somebody passes a random non-malloced address to
On a second thought, NAK. There are too many redundant checks in the code as it
is, and adding these kind of just-in-case checks doesn't do anything to help
spot the actually crucial missing ones. Forest from the trees, you know.
If somebody passes a random non-malloced address to
Closed #1499.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1499#event-4340618014___
Rpm-maint mailing list
@pmatilai does this look okay? I understand it isn’t high priority, but it
makes the API that little bit safer.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@DemiMarie pushed 1 commit.
781dba2b45dc9c3ac3825630ac1ce2f2d34b8451 ‘hdrblobInit’: check pointer is
8-byte aligned
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
> For heavens sake. All along I've asking to make available the reproducer
> cases that you DO HAVE. Nothing else.
Sorry; this was a misunderstanding on my part. Uploaded in the other thread.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or
For heavens sake. All along I've asking to make available the reproducer cases
that you DO HAVE. Nothing else.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
So bottom line, this is all theoretical.
While it's okay to improve theoretical cases too, it is not exactly
high-priority work. Which is why asked you to make those reproducer cases
available so I can prioritize.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to
> Um, seems I wasn't quite awake yesterday. There's no universal law that says
> that every pointer must be 8-byte aligned. Alignment depends on the
> architecture, pointer sizes and all. Like I said, refer to the thing that the
> alignment depends on, ie blob->ie. It's size and alignment is
Um, seems I wasn't quite awake yesterday. There's no universal law that says
that every pointer must be 8-byte aligned. Alignment depends on the
architecture, pointer sizes and all. Like I said, refer to the thing that the
alignment depends on, ie blob->ie. It's size and alignment is most
@DemiMarie pushed 1 commit.
1eb4725e92a00fbcc27caead5a788d70515d2a6b ‘hdrblobInit’: check pointer is
8-byte aligned
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
This is because the void pointer is then cast to an int32_t pointer, right?
Please put that align check into a macro and refer to the actual thing it
depends on, that'll make it much more self-explanatory than this
random/magic-looking `& 7`. Ie something to the tune of `if (chkAlign(uh,
Otherwise, we will dereference a misaligned pointer, which is undefined
behavior.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1499
-- Commit Summary --
* ‘hdrblobInit’: check pointer is 8-byte aligned
-- File Changes
13 matches
Mail list logo
