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
>>>
>>>
next prev parent 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).