On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:04 PM Bobby Bingham wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 04:53:50PM +0000, Noam Meltzer wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:08 PM Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:59:26AM +0000, Noam Meltzer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > From bf23b7b8fd39eaca6a05173eaf543e1bce3319ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > 2001 > > > > From: Noam Meltzer > > > > Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 13:53:24 +0300 > > > > Subject: [PATCH] fix strdupa evaulating expression twice > > > > > > > > calling strdupa with va_arg as its expression caused unexpected > > > > behaviour. now the expression is evaulated only once. > > > > --- > > > > include/string.h | 5 ++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/string.h b/include/string.h > > > > index ff9badb..976faaf 100644 > > > > --- a/include/string.h > > > > +++ b/include/string.h > > > > @@ -85,7 +85,10 @@ size_t strlcpy (char *, const char *, size_t); > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > #ifdef _GNU_SOURCE > > > > -#define strdupa(x) strcpy(alloca(strlen(x)+1),x) > > > > +#define strdupa(x) (__extension__ ({ \ > > > > + const char *__xval = x; \ > > > > + strcpy(alloca(strlen(__xval)+1),__xval); \ > > > > + })) > > > > int strverscmp (const char *, const char *); > > > > int strcasecmp_l (const char *, const char *, locale_t); > > > > int strncasecmp_l (const char *, const char *, size_t, locale_t); > > > > > > The intent of the form as written is to be actual C (modulo use of > > > alloca) rather than "GNU C". Aside from that, strdupa is essentially > > > always-unsafe and should probably be removed or at least made into a > > > warning... > > > > > > > I understand what you're saying and I tend to agree. However: > > * The entire section of the code is wrapped with the _GNU_SOURCE test > > macro (so the __extension__ trick should work). > > * IMHO, if strdupa is to kept, it should at least provide expected > > behaviour. > > _GNU_SOURCE says that the program has requested glibc extensions, like > strdupa. It does not imply anything about the compiler being used and > whether it implements GCC extensions. > Thanks for clearing that out. > > That said, it looks like glibc only defines strdupa #if __GNUC__, so > this function is simply unavailable when using a compiler that doesn't > implement this extension. > > I'm not sure what the musl policy is here, but maybe we could do > something similar? > The __GNUC__ macros is being used in other parts of musl, so is there a reason not to move strdupa into a #if __GNUC__ macro? > > > > p.s. > > I spent about a day of work chasing a bug caused by the current > > implementation. So what I actually looking for is to save this pain from > > others one way or another. > > > > - Noam >