mailing list of musl libc
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Daily reports: Friday
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:53:01 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110709115301.GA6510@openwall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E17877E.30907@gmail.com>

Luka, Rich -

On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 12:41:02AM +0200, Luka Mar??eti?? wrote:
> I wanted to move on to task number 8, but I had some questions. I asked 
> Rich via XMPP about them, but I guess he's still out.

OK, let's wait for Rich's comments on this.  BTW, chances are that the
RLIMIT_NPROC check on setuid(2) and friends will be removed from future
kernels: http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2011/07/06/8

I understand that Rich's proposed tests are about the libc wrapper
functions that are thread-aware rather than about syscalls, yet I felt
the above was relevant to the tests.

> So in the meantime 
> I started doing task number 6 (which is the next one in line, skipping 
> some incomplete ones). I have the basic structure, and will be making a 
> commit in an hour or so, however I'm not sure what method to employ to 
> search for the specified type of functions. Hopefully I'll have an idea 
> by tomorrow (you're welcome to contribute - specific keywords to grep 
> for, for instance?).

I'm afraid that you'll need to manually review function lists, but you
may also use tricks like grepping function prototypes for size_t inside
the argument list.

There's some overlap with 1 ("String operations testing"), though.
Maybe for string functions, this check should be one of those performed
as part of those tests, whereas 6 ("Functions which return strings in
caller-provided buffers") should focus on other functions - things such
as getcwd().  Or maybe not.  Just a thought.

> So again, my plan is finishing 6 first (right now it's called strn.c), 
> then moving on to 8.

Sounds fine to me.  Why not 7 ("Functions which manipulate temp copies
of an argument string"), though?  BTW, let's refer to these things not
only by number, which is error-prone and excludes most members of this
mailing list from participating in the discussion.  For others watching
this discussion and not knowing what the numbers are about:

http://openwall.info/wiki/musl/unit-tests

> P.S. This may be a double-post. If it is, my apologies.

I got only one copy of it.  I find the ever-changing Subjects with
preserved Re: on them weird, though.

Thanks,

Alexander


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-07-09 11:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-05  0:41 Daily reports: Monday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-05 14:24 ` Daily reports: Tuesday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-06 20:28   ` Daily reports: Wednesday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-07 16:18     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2011-07-07 20:27       ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-07 20:16     ` Daily reports: Thursday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-08 22:41       ` Daily reports: Friday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-09  1:12         ` Daily reports: Friday - cont Luka Marčetić
2011-07-09  1:38           ` Solar Designer
2011-07-09 11:53         ` Solar Designer [this message]
2011-07-09 15:30           ` Daily reports: Friday Luka Marčetić
2011-07-09 22:11             ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 19:46             ` Solar Designer
2011-07-10 14:52           ` Daily reports: Friday (threaded setuid testing) Rich Felker
2011-07-11 22:59             ` Daily cluts reports Luka Marčetić
2011-07-14  9:57               ` cluts: strerror_r() test (was: Daily cluts reports) Solar Designer
2011-07-14 10:41                 ` cluts: strerror_r() test Luka Marčetić
2011-07-14 10:47                   ` Solar Designer
2011-07-14 17:55                   ` Rich Felker
2011-07-14 19:35                     ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-15  0:09               ` Daily cluts reports Luka Marčetić
2011-07-15 22:47                 ` Daily cluts reports - numeric, setuid, and mid-term evaluation Luka Marčetić
2011-07-15 23:51                   ` Rich Felker
2011-07-17  0:37                   ` Daily cluts reports - setuid reiteration Luka Marčetić

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110709115301.GA6510@openwall.com \
    --to=solar@openwall.com \
    --cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).