This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/7] tunables: Add support for tunables of uint64_t type
On Tuesday 16 May 2017 03:39 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> As for previous patch we should update README.tunables with this new allowed
> type. Also, I think we should add that both hexadecimal and octal are also
> supported.
I've added this.
> I think this does not really handle overflows correctly and I would suggest
> to actually use the new check_mul_overflow_size_t macro from reallocarray
> patch to actually check it and result UINT64_MAX for the case.
I don't understand, can you please elaborate? I am specifically trying
to ensure that the computation does not overflow at all and saturating
the result at UINT64_MAX if the result is too large. The subsequent
TUNABLE_SET_VAL_IF_VALID_RANGE check should then do a range check before
setting the tunable value and refuse to set it if it is beyond the
bounds of the tunable type.
> Also, do we have any generic value range input test for tunable interface
> (to check for validation, overflow, underflow, etc.)?
TUNABLE_SET_VAL_IF_VALID_RANGE does the range check and avoids setting
the tunable if the value is not within the range of its type or the set
range, whichever is smaller.
Siddhesh