From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 26595 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2020 11:25:17 -0000
Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 Nov 2020 11:25:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 28200 invoked by uid 550); 11 Nov 2020 11:25:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 28179 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2020 11:25:12 -0000
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:25:00 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
To: Alexey Izbyshev <izbyshev@ispras.ru>
Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com
Message-ID: <20201111112500.GI1370092@port70.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Alexey Izbyshev <izbyshev@ispras.ru>,
	musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <20201030185716.GE534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <5298816.XTEcGr0bgB@nanabozho>
 <20201031033117.GH534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20201106033616.GX534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20201108161215.GE1370092@port70.net>
 <20201109170729.GA534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20201109215901.GG1370092@port70.net>
 <20201109222320.GC534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20201111005216.GH534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <ddd7b2bb1e02df633caa70c6dc90b7c5@ispras.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ddd7b2bb1e02df633caa70c6dc90b7c5@ispras.ru>
Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH v2] MT fork

* Alexey Izbyshev <izbyshev@ispras.ru> [2020-11-11 09:35:22 +0300]:
> On 2020-11-11 03:52, Rich Felker wrote:
> > Here's a proposed first patch in series, getting rid of getdelim/stdio
> > usage in ldso. I think that suffices to set the stage for adding
> > __libc_malloc, __libc_free, __libc_calloc, __libc_realloc and having
> > ldso use them.
> > 

if we don't have to replicate a lot of code in ldso then this sounds good.

> > +static ssize_t read_loop(int fd, void *p, size_t n)
> > +{
> > +    unsigned char *b = p;
> > +    for (size_t l, i=0; i<n; i+=l) {
> > +        l = read(fd, b+i, n-i);
> > +        if (l<0) {
> > +            if (errno==EINTR) continue;
> This increments `i` by a negative `l`.

it's worse: l cannot be negative so the error check is ineffective.

maybe it should be ssize_t? or check == -1

> > +            else return -1;
> > +        }
> > +        if (l==0) return i;
> > +    }
> > +    return n;
> > +}
> 
> > +                if (fd>=0) {
> > +                    size_t n = 0;
> > +                    if (!fstat(fd, &st)) n = st.st_size;
> > +                    sys_path = malloc(n+1);
> > +                    sys_path[n] = 0;
> `sys_path` can be NULL here.
> > +                    if (!sys_path || read_loop(fd, sys_path, n)<0) {
> >                         free(sys_path);
> >                         sys_path = "";
> >                     }
> > -                    fclose(f);
> > +                    close(fd);
> >                 } else if (errno != ENOENT) {
> >                     sys_path = "";
> >                 }
> 
> Alexey