Re: [PATCH v9 00/37] propose config-based hooks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, May 26 2021, Emily Shaffer wrote:

> After much delay and $DAYJOB, here is v9.

Thanks. Haven't done any deep review of this yet. Just skimming things
from v8 & commenting as I go along...

> - Addressed nits in reviews on v8
> [...
>   Ævar's updated system_or_die() function
> - changed strbuf to char* in hooks_list
>   - Attempted to do so in run_command's stdout callback, but this made
>     length protection difficult, so stuck with strbuf there.

I see there's still quite a bit of that strbuf churn still in this
series, e.g. unfixed issues noted in
https://lore.kernel.org/git/87pn04g0r1.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ e.g. in
07/37 you're still doing this:
	
	+	struct strbuf hookname = STRBUF_INIT;
	+ [...]
	+	strbuf_addstr(&hookname, argv[0]);
	+	opt.run_hookdir = should_run_hookdir;
	+
	+	rc = run_hooks(hookname.buf, &opt);
	+
	+	strbuf_release(&hookname);

So fair enough n the run_command's stdout callback, but it seems there's
still quite a bit of strbuf encapsulating for no apparent benefit.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux