Re: long (never ending?) do_install for adwaita-icon-theme

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 18:27 +0300, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On 08/28/2017 06:14 PM, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> > 
> > On 08/28/2017 05:43 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > The bitfield operation that says "can I read this fd?" probably
> > > overflows into the next data item in the structure (I haven't
> > > checked
> > > exactly how it fails). It may be "set", certainly the case I
> > > debugged
> > > had to have thought it was and the code thinks "fd 1025 is ready
> > > for
> > > reading" when in fact it may not be. The code then calls read()
> > > on it
> > > and if it wasn't ready for reading, it would block.
> > Right; what I am getting at is that we might have a bug here 
> > (specifically the absence of check against FD_SETSIZE), rather
> > than 
> > something that needs to be solved by switching to poll().
> > 
> > Does the code use that constant anywhere?
> 
>
> Actually, wait: "Executing FD_CLR() or FD_SET() with a value of fd
> that is negative or is equal to or larger than FD_SETSIZE will result
> in undefined behavior." (man select)
> 
> This means that select() cannot be used with fd >= FD_SETSIZE at all?

Correct. The code has no guards on this happening.

Cheers,

Richard