git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] unpack: replace xwrite() loop with write_in_full()
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2024 08:43:03 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqzfveq76w.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqfrx6sbdf.fsf@gitster.g> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Sun, 03 Mar 2024 23:29:48 -0800")

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
>
>>> -		while (input_len) {
>>> -			err = xwrite(1, input_buffer + input_offset, input_len);
>>> -			if (err <= 0)
>>> -				break;
>>> -			input_len -= err;
>>> -			input_offset += err;
>>> -		}
>>> +		/* Write the last part of the buffer to stdout */
>>> +		write_in_full(1, input_buffer + input_offset, input_len);
>>
>> With this change we stop updating `input_len` and `input_offset`, both
>> of which are global variables. Assuming that tests pass this must be
>> okay right now given that this is the final part of what we are writing.
>> But I wonder whether we shouldn't update those regardless just so that
>> these remain consistent?
>
> It is probably a good hygiene, even though it may not matter at all
> for the correctness in the current code.
>
> Thanks for your sharp eyes.

Actually, I changed my mind.  As you said, this is flushing the very
end of the data in the input_buffer[] and nobody will fill() the
input_buffer[] after the call to this function happens.

>>> -	while (len) {
>>> ...
>>> -		len -= ret;
>>> -		offset += ret;
>>> -	}
>>> +	write_in_full(1, buffer + offset, len);
>>
>> Same here.

Ditto.  We are about to pass the control back to the caller that
will exit using the "has_errors" we return from here.

>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>>  	/* All done */
>>>  	return has_errors;
>>> -- 
>>> 2.44.0-84-gb387623c12
>>> 
>>> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-04 16:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-02 19:03 [PATCH 0/3] Auditing use of xwrite() Junio C Hamano
2024-03-02 19:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] unpack: replace xwrite() loop with write_in_full() Junio C Hamano
2024-03-04  6:58   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-03-04  7:29     ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-04 16:43       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-03-02 19:03 ` [PATCH 2/3] sideband: avoid short write(2) Junio C Hamano
2024-03-02 19:03 ` [PATCH 3/3] repack: check error writing to pack-objects subprocess Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqzfveq76w.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).