* Re: LARGE_PACKET_MAX wrong? [not found] <077B805D-B618-41B2-84A6-BA2E3E5644F2@gmail.com> @ 2016-07-26 13:42 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread From: Jeff King @ 2016-07-26 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Schneider; +Cc: Git Mailing List, schacon On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 03:07:41PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > I am reading the pkt-line code and stumbled across this oddity: > > LARGE_PACKET_MAX is defined as 65520 > https://github.com/git/git/blob/8c6d1f9807c67532e7fb545a944b064faff0f70b/pkt-line.h#L79 > > In `format_packet` we check that the 4 bytes of length data plus payload is not larger than LARGE_PACKET_MAX (= 65520) > https://github.com/git/git/blob/8c6d1f9807c67532e7fb545a944b064faff0f70b/pkt-line.c#L111-L112 > > However, in the documentation we state that 4 bytes of length data plus payload must not exceed 65524 > https://github.com/git/git/blob/8c6d1f9807c67532e7fb545a944b064faff0f70b/Documentation/technical/protocol-common.txt#L70-L72 > > Who is right? Code or documentation? I think the documentation is wrong. Git's packet_read() will complain on a 65524-byte incoming packet (it actually handles up to 65523, but that is simply a quirk of the implementation). The sending sides always include the 4-byte header in the LARGE_PACKET_MAX calculations. So I don't know what was intended once upon a time, but I think we have to stick to what the code does, because there are many deployed instances that we cannot break compatibility with. -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2016-07-26 13:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <077B805D-B618-41B2-84A6-BA2E3E5644F2@gmail.com>
2016-07-26 13:42 ` LARGE_PACKET_MAX wrong? Jeff King
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).