Quoting Nathan Lynch (ntl@xxxxxxxxx): > "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Else my checkpoing image gets reeeaallly huge. Just passing the > > result of sizeof() however does the right thing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > checkpoint/namespace.c | 12 ++++++------ > > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > But right above the code you're changing we have: > > h->sysname_len = sizeof(name->sysname); > h->nodename_len = sizeof(name->nodename); > h->release_len = sizeof(name->release); > h->version_len = sizeof(name->version); > h->machine_len = sizeof(name->machine); > h->domainname_len = sizeof(name->domainname); > > Your patch shouldn't change any behavior. What gives? "Shouldn't", perhaps, but does. I assumed the compiler guessed that i wanted an int in the second case and gave me a different result for that sizeof. > (PS: ckpt_write_string and friends should take a size_t or some other > unsigned type for len.) There I agree, but then we need to check that no callers are passing in potentially negative signed ints coming from userspace, so I thought this patch would spur discussion about best path forward (plus make checkpoint work for me again :) -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
