From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C70C433F5 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 17:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2704060FC1 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 17:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230433AbhINRbi (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:31:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53472 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229464AbhINRbi (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:31:38 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85E37C061574 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id b7so18179254iob.4 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:30:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=t64Yg3vFja0L6weEO/jHuhR3UJyABFmRFbd856u5WcY=; b=Wi1Jd8vSxNb42/j5ZXVoAYxEJ7Gin8X83zs9BzuO6ic56iT2/v4EZCy4+fcfWKhvIL 0T3JJdjb7Knady96Yd1eM8u58/aRgg74R06Kgb8IAm7qKCUcTdLHctRExM9Zvcfu2hek QwIWPzJg3NqgKPODwae7kdmJztRYl7pX/gJV1tMVlFrUxbJChUCqPUTAKa8DxDkW8HMq Ym5DJbqSy4zo1xwifLn2aE4J6yrfERL2mmKqC9eZV4grCUlnBkzYS7D1N+wJBokINZZS +e6LLlgMNZRJRYfLSuBQRIfOLBoiMlSM5mg39nMquiLltNCrzxEUusT9/gI4q6wtrDC9 t3gw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=t64Yg3vFja0L6weEO/jHuhR3UJyABFmRFbd856u5WcY=; b=sDXMxOJWttPjbl3tRqdy+TDQpjsPLH1dxxd+3iI73yRyOJYbS8it1ghCA7WYTo6ev5 2XrDVWv6A9ApkgsuM5gFKXZzCvKDlBqF6e4pDChQsySl3fkh1N2yAB0Rr76Uj81A4pMD ofFReUGbIrX7IgstHIoiwdxB2xoRV66Uz6vp5GdXVrAbhDIkjRbtoGCBUZ9pLgtSus1o JawQ9DTuPEwI8dzTx74rEm/FU4vuu48EA8U5087O7ooUgUuDtLRcY+WN7OXG0omDRVpI zjZF+rNuaTk+u7M9ifQgNxHmdS+GVuXqn7EBleVxgueU2Rb9hxYjig+G6ZbYspgdq2vq tR+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Z4I/sEP9JAFS5OzNjEmntXQmtI7ZK0fycDRqBCtc1HDTib7hw TDzFjHaRzaJ4n8o/wOfs7B4zfQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5TfO9HHat4nlEWcZhxVuWTVtrmS66Q783/kNeMGLRz/PkPfUtOEoVyJTVgsO3cs0g8BxmEQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5e:d80a:: with SMTP id l10mr14287351iok.36.1631640620027; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i14sm6776703iog.47.2021.09.14.10.30.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:30:19 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] reducing memory allocations for v2 servers Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:29:46AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > While looking at [1], I noticed that v2 servers will read a few bits of > client input into strvecs. Even though we expect these to be small-ish, > there's nothing preventing a client from sending us a bunch of junk and > wasting memory. > > This series changes that, putting a cap on how much data we'll receive. > The two spots are the "capabilities" list we receive (before we even > dispatch to a particular command like ls-refs or fetch), and the > ref-prefix list we receive for ls-refs. > > [...] Thanks. I reviewed this series carefully and all of my comments were either of the form "you could have written it this way, but I'm equally happy with what you wrote here" or "this behavior change won't affect real users and so I'm OK with it". Reviewed-by: Taylor Blau Thanks, Taylor