[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN i
From: |
noreply |
Subject: |
[patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned |
Date: |
Fri, 01 Aug 2003 06:41:16 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686) Gecko/20030714 Galeon/1.3.5 Debian/1.3.5.20030714-2 |
Patch #1754 has been updated.
Project:
Category: libstore
Status: Open
Summary: store_{read,write} abort program when LEN is not aligned
Follow-Ups:
Date: Wed 07/23/2003 at 13:35
By: ogi
Comment:
* Copyright years are updated.
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 07/31/2003 at 22:46
By: marcus
Comment:
The assert is there to catch bugs in libstore using programs, which usually
only access store blocks with aligned boundaries.
Do you have an application which doesn't do this, or did you see a Hurd program
using libstore in a way that triggers the assertion?
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 08/01/2003 at 09:15
By: ogi
Comment:
I hit this problem while patching e2fsprogs to work with libstore. e2fsprogs
uses some unaligned reads from block devices.
If libstore was internal library in the Hurd, I would agree with you. But
native Hurd programs (not in the Hurd distribution) can legally want to use the
library, so libstore must behave correctly on invalid arguments. For example,
munmap returns EINVAL if address is not aligned, it doesn't throw assertion
failure. What is the difference between munmap and store_read so that
store_read have to not return EINVAL on invalid arguments?
Moreover, every program that uses store_read must check if I/O errors occured.
So the EINVAL will always be caught ;-)
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 08/01/2003 at 12:41
By: marcus
Comment:
Why does e2fsprogs unaligned reads? I would like to discuss what it does,
independently of resolving this patch.
I agree that eventually we want to make libstore more robust But before we can
do that, we must check that all existing callers, at least those in the Hurd
code, but preferably also parted etc, do check the return value properly. Can
you please do that?
-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
For more info, visit:
http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=1754&group_id=30
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/01
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/02
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/02
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned,
noreply <=
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/03
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/03
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/04
- [patch #1754] [Patch #1754] store_{read, write} abort program when LEN is not aligned, noreply, 2003/08/04