From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/17 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?THVrYSBNYXLEjWV0acSH?= Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Weekly reports: A Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 02:37:46 +0200 Message-ID: <4DE043DA.1020104@gmail.com> References: <4DDA9C8E.5020105@gmail.com> <20110524010029.GA11834@openwall.com> <20110524011320.GV277@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1306543103 21201 80.91.229.12 (28 May 2011 00:38:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 00:38:23 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-100-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat May 28 02:38:20 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QQ7Xn-0005Sh-V0 for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 28 May 2011 02:38:20 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 18096 invoked by uid 550); 28 May 2011 00:38:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 18088 invoked from network); 28 May 2011 00:38:19 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fBHuXVJyPa/4ePuRjTWMPwTPKP1wA4mKgxM4K9J37wo=; b=dm/GFjH/W0kgjto3kasr15tJI0x2sCX4YHsX0H+B9d3W35ICoWFHRGdIXCfWJU2J4h W0+1iYATCiQB56B17urO4LrkbS6p6FuwV5cbbWKVQ/tdX5UDBNdIzKBAS6j4OOuuAJJl Fpw/JdEj/ncQej9/kO7cNcY5JP55KJHMybiRw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=tECA0+uWRAibG4rIm3FwIdW+co407lC+zurWd5t64O5GQ4ATPA4ZdXuAfRXBo4DBmx 6+B36uMXWnJyGOvwFoIGpTn0XyIzwfoaXR3eQIEE66ksoNVHpZquXRZne5XYOjdCr0+2 EdUva98ERnWxK25wYKfR6vAOG8Bn6L+nhc8uM= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110505 Icedove/3.0.11 In-Reply-To: <20110524011320.GV277@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:17 Archived-At: On 05/24/2011 03:13 AM, Rich Felker wrote: >> > For "low and high byte content", I suggest that you include ability to >> > test all byte values (for non-wide chars). glibc and many other libc's >> > include implementations of string functions that use adds/bitmasks; >> > these might contain bugs that only show up with specific byte values in >> > specific character positions when the libc is built for specific CPUs. >> > I agree. I don't believe any such issues affect the current C > implementations in musl, but it would be nice to have the tests in > place in case anyone wants to add arch-specific asm versions. > Hey guys. I would just like to point out that the above, combined with the "all alignments" requirement from the wiki means I'm essentially brute-forcing string.h functions. While I generally dislike the idea, it's a.. thorough approach.. I guess. As a slight remedy I'll "brute force" with smaller buffers, and only do basic tests with huge ones. I hope that won't miss the point then. Will report how mmaping more than a single GiB goes (1 is what I have). Good night, -Luka