On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 14:14:47 +0200, Michal Prívozník wrote: > On 6/14/21 1:31 PM, Tim Wiederhake wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 13:06 +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote: > >> In a few occasions in tests we pass INT_MAX to > >> virFileReadLimFD(). This is not safe because virFileReadAll() > >> will call virFileReadLimFD() under the hood which takes the limit > >> and adds 1 to it. > > > > Calling virFileReadAll with "INT_MAX - 1" looks funny. Is it possible > > to check for "maxlen >= INT_MAX" in virFileReadLimFD instead? > > Actually, I don't understand why we need to add 1 in the first place. > I'll push the other two patches and send v2 for this that removes the +1. It's so that it guarantees that a file of 'maxlen' length is read completely and the terminating '\0' is in the resulting string. Removing the '+ 1' would change this kind of semantics, which may require audit of all callers.
