From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA7813B2B0 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 20:21:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725913265; cv=none; b=IcnvHNB5VUEl5BTEr1dzNSHGP1wHXQeFtXQO+TeLCMtgiOgQ/5PNaWRGmo1u7Xi8QuTKVkL6utrs4FZmP6+1BInvErN+uhbTdP6KWqr2CopzQzlGRdt4hBJ7+cqKXaA5lnMSgInwVNqLyA2mwcSg+UcUlIV7TRw5j8wdbDgNiZw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725913265; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cOPpg0S514AjCu1hE0NOZ5nSC7yHKMSdIvxJ9GmAV14=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Nax6rbJYWyMGHr8lkzX68CDOn5rIA3QV2pCMzXhYZuv5C2oMjq+zBWUp2jfDyuLjS4h0KZAZNIjP63FTn0iC1yDChei9geOR1lJuGSYd67V6NqjkqPTBbJMQMjpDJPGGBtZj+DO4YTi69vq50Mohlxk54k4mD+rMuvfFcUltRYo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Received: (qmail 31000 invoked by uid 109); 9 Sep 2024 20:21:01 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Sep 2024 20:21:01 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 22577 invoked by uid 111); 9 Sep 2024 20:20:58 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 09 Sep 2024 16:20:58 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:20:58 -0400 From: Jeff King To: "brian m. carlson" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: header signatures for hash transition? Message-ID: <20240909202058.GA348398@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20240908233636.GA4026999@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 09:44:26AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: > > We still separately find the start of the in-body signature and return a > > "size_t nonsiglen", though it's a bit awkward (it's counting from the > > body start, and I am coming from the subject start, but if we assume > > they're contiguous, it's just a little pointer math). So if this > > approach is still useful in the long run, I can work around it. But my > > initial approach (before digging in the history) was to drop the > > separate buffer, something like the patch below, since it also drops > > some useless extra copying of the tag contents. > > It was probably that this code was to fix one or more of the > signature-related atoms in the tests, but I can't speak to it more than > that. I trust that you'll make a suitable change that fixes the issue, > but I'm afraid I can't be more help than that. OK, thanks. I'll proceed with something like the patch that I showed earlier. It shouldn't change any existing behavior, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't going to make life harder for you in the future. -Peff