On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:55:05AM -0400, Peter Cordes wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 03:05:08PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > This prevents a crash when running the command:
> >
> > fsck -t AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA /dev/sda
> >
> > Reported-by: Hornseth_Brenan@xxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > disk-utils/fsck.c | 15 +++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/disk-utils/fsck.c b/disk-utils/fsck.c
> > index 58fd8ac59..8a07bc272 100644
> > --- a/disk-utils/fsck.c
> > +++ b/disk-utils/fsck.c
> > @@ -544,20 +544,20 @@ static char *find_fsck(const char *type)
> > {
> > char *s;
> > const char *tpl;
> > - static char prog[256];
> > + static char *prog = NULL;
>
> You're allocating / freeing every time it's used, so it shouldn't be
> static anymore.
Ah, I miss the "static". Thanks.
> It might be easier to just use snprintf to truncate long strings,
> instead of introducing dynamic allocation which requires explicit
> freeing. OTOH xasprintf makes it re-entrant / thread-safe, at the
> cost of forcing the caller to care about memory management. (And at
> the cost of efficiency: prog is allocated / freed inside the loop.)
Well, I don't think dynamic allocation so big issue in this case, but
I'll try to improve it on Monday to make the code more elegant.
Maybe all we need is to check -t argument and reject non-senses
already in main() ;-)
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
