All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
@ 2017-04-17 16:17 David Turner
  2017-04-18  1:19 ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Turner @ 2017-04-17 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: git; +Cc: peff, l.s.r, jrnieder, David Turner

If the full hostname doesn't fit in the buffer supplied to
gethostname, POSIX does not specify whether the buffer will be
null-terminated, so to be safe, we should do it ourselves.  Introduce
new function, xgethostname, which ensures that there is always a \0
at the end of the buffer.

Always use a consistent buffer size when calling xgethostname.  We use
HOST_NAME_MAX + 1.  When this is unavailable, we fall back to 256, a
decision we previously made in daemon.c, but which we now move to
git-compat-util.h so that it can be used everywhere.

Signed-off-by: David Turner <dturner@twosigma.com>
---

This version addresses some comments by René Scharfe.  René, we're
still silently truncating, but as I noted in my message to Jonathan:
Looking at the users of this function, I think most would be happier
with a truncated buffer than an error:

* gc.c: used to see if we are the same machine as the machine that
locked the repo. it is unlikely that two machines have hostnames that
differ only in the 256th-or-above character, and it would be weird to
fail to gc just because our hostname is long.
* fetch-pack.c, receive-pack.c: similar to gc.c; the hostname is a note
in the .keep file for human consumption only
* ident.c: used to make up a fake email address. On my laptop,
gethostname returns "corey" (no domain part), so the email address is
not likely to be valid anyway.

 builtin/gc.c           |  6 +++---
 builtin/receive-pack.c |  4 ++--
 daemon.c               |  4 ----
 fetch-pack.c           |  4 ++--
 git-compat-util.h      |  6 ++++++
 ident.c                |  4 ++--
 wrapper.c              | 13 +++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
index c2c61a57bb..5de0209c59 100644
--- a/builtin/gc.c
+++ b/builtin/gc.c
@@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ static int need_to_gc(void)
 static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 {
 	static struct lock_file lock;
-	char my_host[128];
+	char my_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
 	struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
 	struct stat st;
 	uintmax_t pid;
@@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 		/* already locked */
 		return NULL;
 
-	if (gethostname(my_host, sizeof(my_host)))
+	if (xgethostname(my_host, sizeof(my_host)))
 		xsnprintf(my_host, sizeof(my_host), "unknown");
 
 	pidfile_path = git_pathdup("gc.pid");
 	fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&lock, pidfile_path,
 				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
 	if (!force) {
-		static char locking_host[128];
+		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
 		int should_exit;
 		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
 		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
diff --git a/builtin/receive-pack.c b/builtin/receive-pack.c
index aca9c33d8d..0ca423a711 100644
--- a/builtin/receive-pack.c
+++ b/builtin/receive-pack.c
@@ -1695,12 +1695,12 @@ static const char *unpack(int err_fd, struct shallow_info *si)
 		if (status)
 			return "unpack-objects abnormal exit";
 	} else {
-		char hostname[256];
+		char hostname[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
 
 		argv_array_pushl(&child.args, "index-pack",
 				 "--stdin", hdr_arg, NULL);
 
-		if (gethostname(hostname, sizeof(hostname)))
+		if (xgethostname(hostname, sizeof(hostname)))
 			xsnprintf(hostname, sizeof(hostname), "localhost");
 		argv_array_pushf(&child.args,
 				 "--keep=receive-pack %"PRIuMAX" on %s",
diff --git a/daemon.c b/daemon.c
index 473e6b6b63..1503e1ed6f 100644
--- a/daemon.c
+++ b/daemon.c
@@ -4,10 +4,6 @@
 #include "strbuf.h"
 #include "string-list.h"
 
-#ifndef HOST_NAME_MAX
-#define HOST_NAME_MAX 256
-#endif
-
 #ifdef NO_INITGROUPS
 #define initgroups(x, y) (0) /* nothing */
 #endif
diff --git a/fetch-pack.c b/fetch-pack.c
index d07d85ce30..15d59a0440 100644
--- a/fetch-pack.c
+++ b/fetch-pack.c
@@ -802,8 +802,8 @@ static int get_pack(struct fetch_pack_args *args,
 		if (args->use_thin_pack)
 			argv_array_push(&cmd.args, "--fix-thin");
 		if (args->lock_pack || unpack_limit) {
-			char hostname[256];
-			if (gethostname(hostname, sizeof(hostname)))
+			char hostname[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
+			if (xgethostname(hostname, sizeof(hostname)))
 				xsnprintf(hostname, sizeof(hostname), "localhost");
 			argv_array_pushf(&cmd.args,
 					"--keep=fetch-pack %"PRIuMAX " on %s",
diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h
index 8a4a3f85e7..bd04564a69 100644
--- a/git-compat-util.h
+++ b/git-compat-util.h
@@ -884,6 +884,12 @@ static inline size_t xsize_t(off_t len)
 __attribute__((format (printf, 3, 4)))
 extern int xsnprintf(char *dst, size_t max, const char *fmt, ...);
 
+#ifndef HOST_NAME_MAX
+#define HOST_NAME_MAX 256
+#endif
+
+extern int xgethostname(char *buf, size_t len);
+
 /* in ctype.c, for kwset users */
 extern const unsigned char tolower_trans_tbl[256];
 
diff --git a/ident.c b/ident.c
index c0364fe3a1..bea871c8e0 100644
--- a/ident.c
+++ b/ident.c
@@ -120,9 +120,9 @@ static int canonical_name(const char *host, struct strbuf *out)
 
 static void add_domainname(struct strbuf *out, int *is_bogus)
 {
-	char buf[1024];
+	char buf[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
 
-	if (gethostname(buf, sizeof(buf))) {
+	if (xgethostname(buf, sizeof(buf))) {
 		warning_errno("cannot get host name");
 		strbuf_addstr(out, "(none)");
 		*is_bogus = 1;
diff --git a/wrapper.c b/wrapper.c
index 0542fc7582..d837417709 100644
--- a/wrapper.c
+++ b/wrapper.c
@@ -655,3 +655,16 @@ void sleep_millisec(int millisec)
 {
 	poll(NULL, 0, millisec);
 }
+
+int xgethostname(char *buf, size_t len)
+{
+	/*
+	 * If the full hostname doesn't fit in buf, POSIX does not
+	 * specify whether the buffer will be null-terminated, so to
+	 * be safe, do it ourselves.
+	 */
+	int ret = gethostname(buf, len);
+	if (!ret)
+		buf[len - 1] = 0;
+	return ret;
+}
-- 
2.11.GIT


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-17 16:17 [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames David Turner
@ 2017-04-18  1:19 ` Junio C Hamano
  2017-04-18  1:41   ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-04-18  1:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Turner; +Cc: git, peff, l.s.r, jrnieder

David Turner <dturner@twosigma.com> writes:

> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
> ...
>  	if (!force) {
> -		static char locking_host[128];
> +		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
>  		int should_exit;
>  		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>  		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));

I compared the result of applying this v2 directly on top of master
and applying René's "Use HOST_NAME_MAX"and then applying your v1.  
This hunk is the only difference.

As this locking_host is used like so in the later part of the code:

 			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
 			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
 			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
 			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);

I suspect that turning it to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 without tweaking
the format "%127c" gives us an inconsistent resulting code.

Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are
comparing it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to take this
version to size locking_host to also HOST_NAME_MAX + 1, and then
scan with %255c (but then shouldn't we scan with %256c instead?  I
am not sure where these +1 comes from).

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18  1:19 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2017-04-18  1:41   ` Junio C Hamano
  2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-04-18  1:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Turner; +Cc: git, peff, l.s.r, jrnieder

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> David Turner <dturner@twosigma.com> writes:
>
>> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>> ...
>>  	if (!force) {
>> -		static char locking_host[128];
>> +		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
>>  		int should_exit;
>>  		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>>  		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>
> I compared the result of applying this v2 directly on top of master
> and applying René's "Use HOST_NAME_MAX"and then applying your v1.  
> This hunk is the only difference.
>
> As this locking_host is used like so in the later part of the code:
>
>  			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
>  			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
>  			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
>  			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
>
> I suspect that turning it to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 without tweaking
> the format "%127c" gives us an inconsistent resulting code.
>
> Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are
> comparing it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to take this
> version to size locking_host to also HOST_NAME_MAX + 1, and then
> scan with %255c (but then shouldn't we scan with %256c instead?  I
> am not sure where these +1 comes from).

That is, something along this line...

 builtin/gc.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
index be75508292..4f85610d87 100644
--- a/builtin/gc.c
+++ b/builtin/gc.c
@@ -240,7 +240,11 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
 	if (!force) {
 		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
+		static char *scan_fmt;
 		int should_exit;
+
+		if (!scan_fmt)
+			scan_fmt = xstrfmt("%s %%%dc", "%"SCNuMAX, HOST_NAME_MAX);
 		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
 		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
 		should_exit =
@@ -256,7 +260,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 			 * running.
 			 */
 			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
-			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
+			fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
 			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
 			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
 		if (fp != NULL)

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18  1:41   ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
  2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
                         ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: René Scharfe @ 2017-04-18 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Junio C Hamano, David Turner; +Cc: git, peff, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

Am 18.04.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> 
>> David Turner <dturner@twosigma.com> writes:
>>
>>> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>>> ...
>>>   	if (!force) {
>>> -		static char locking_host[128];
>>> +		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
>>>   		int should_exit;
>>>   		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>>>   		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>>
>> I compared the result of applying this v2 directly on top of master
>> and applying René's "Use HOST_NAME_MAX"and then applying your v1.
>> This hunk is the only difference.
>>
>> As this locking_host is used like so in the later part of the code:
>>
>>   			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
>>   			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
>>   			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
>>   			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
>>
>> I suspect that turning it to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 without tweaking
>> the format "%127c" gives us an inconsistent resulting code.

Oh, missed that.  Thanks for catching it!

>> Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are
>> comparing it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to take this
>> version to size locking_host to also HOST_NAME_MAX + 1, and then
>> scan with %255c (but then shouldn't we scan with %256c instead?  I
>> am not sure where these +1 comes from).
> 
> That is, something along this line...
> 
>   builtin/gc.c | 6 +++++-
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> index be75508292..4f85610d87 100644
> --- a/builtin/gc.c
> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -240,7 +240,11 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>   				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
>   	if (!force) {
>   		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
> +		static char *scan_fmt;
>   		int should_exit;
> +
> +		if (!scan_fmt)
> +			scan_fmt = xstrfmt("%s %%%dc", "%"SCNuMAX, HOST_NAME_MAX);
>   		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>   		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>   		should_exit =
> @@ -256,7 +260,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>   			 * running.
>   			 */
>   			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
> -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> +			fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
>   			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
>   			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
>   		if (fp != NULL)
> 

How important is it to scan the whole file in one call?  We could split
it up like this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length.  We
need to be permissive here to allow machines with different values for
HOST_NAME_MAX to work with the same file on a network file system, so
this would have to be the first patch, right?

NB: That && cascade has enough meat for a whole function.

René

---
 builtin/gc.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
index 1fca84c19d..d5e880028e 100644
--- a/builtin/gc.c
+++ b/builtin/gc.c
@@ -251,10 +251,9 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 	fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&lock, pidfile_path,
 				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
 	if (!force) {
-		static char locking_host[128];
+		static struct strbuf locking_host = STRBUF_INIT;
 		int should_exit;
 		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
-		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
 		should_exit =
 			fp != NULL &&
 			!fstat(fileno(fp), &st) &&
@@ -268,9 +267,10 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 			 * running.
 			 */
 			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
-			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
+			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", &pid) == 1 &&
+			!strbuf_getwholeline(&locking_host, fp, '\0') &&
 			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
-			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
+			(strcmp(locking_host.buf, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
 		if (fp != NULL)
 			fclose(fp);
 		if (should_exit) {
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
 				rollback_lock_file(&lock);
 			*ret_pid = pid;
 			free(pidfile_path);
-			return locking_host;
+			return locking_host.buf;
 		}
 	}
 
-- 
2.12.2

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
@ 2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
  2017-04-19  1:47         ` Junio C Hamano
  2017-04-18 17:52       ` David Turner
  2017-04-19  1:49       ` Junio C Hamano
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2017-04-18 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: René Scharfe; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, David Turner, git, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:07:43PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:

> > -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> > +			fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> >   			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
> >   			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
> >   		if (fp != NULL)
> > 
> 
> How important is it to scan the whole file in one call?  We could split
> it up like this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length.  We
> need to be permissive here to allow machines with different values for
> HOST_NAME_MAX to work with the same file on a network file system, so
> this would have to be the first patch, right?

I doubt that doing it in one call matters. It's not like stdio promises
us any atomicity in the first place.

> -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> +			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", &pid) == 1 &&
> +			!strbuf_getwholeline(&locking_host, fp, '\0') &&

I don't think there is anything wrong with using fscanf here, but it has
enough pitfalls in general that I don't really like its use as a parser
(and the general lack of it in Git's code base seems to agree).

I wonder if this should just read a line (or the whole file) into a
strbuf and parse it there. That would better match our usual style, I
think.

I can live with it either way.

> NB: That && cascade has enough meat for a whole function.

Yeah.

-Peff

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* RE: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
  2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
@ 2017-04-18 17:52       ` David Turner
  2017-04-19  3:49         ` Junio C Hamano
  2017-04-19  1:49       ` Junio C Hamano
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Turner @ 2017-04-18 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'René Scharfe', Junio C Hamano
  Cc: git, peff, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: René Scharfe [mailto:l.s.r@web.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 12:08 PM
> To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>; David Turner
... 
> >> Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are comparing
> >> it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to take this version to
> >> size locking_host to also HOST_NAME_MAX + 1, and then scan with %255c
> >> (but then shouldn't we scan with %256c instead?  I am not sure where
> >> these +1 comes from).
> >
> > That is, something along this line...
> >
> >   builtin/gc.c | 6 +++++-
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c index be75508292..4f85610d87
> > 100644
> > --- a/builtin/gc.c
> > +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> > @@ -240,7 +240,11 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t*
> ret_pid)
> >   				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
> >   	if (!force) {
> >   		static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
> > +		static char *scan_fmt;
> >   		int should_exit;
> > +
> > +		if (!scan_fmt)
> > +			scan_fmt = xstrfmt("%s %%%dc", "%"SCNuMAX,
> HOST_NAME_MAX);
> >   		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
> >   		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
> >   		should_exit =
> > @@ -256,7 +260,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t*
> ret_pid)
> >   			 * running.
> >   			 */
> >   			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
> > -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host)
> == 2 &&
> > +			fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> >   			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
> >   			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno
> == EPERM);
> >   		if (fp != NULL)
> >
> 
> How important is it to scan the whole file in one call?  We could split it up like
> this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length.  We need to be
> permissive here to allow machines with different values for HOST_NAME_MAX
> to work with the same file on a network file system, so this would have to be the
> first patch, right?

If the writer has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, this will work fine.  If the reader
has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, and the writer's actual value is too long,
then there's no way the strcmp would succeed anyway.  So I don't think we need
to worry about it.

> NB: That && cascade has enough meat for a whole function.

+1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
@ 2017-04-19  1:47         ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-04-19  1:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jeff King; +Cc: René Scharfe, David Turner, git, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> I doubt that doing it in one call matters. It's not like stdio promises
> us any atomicity in the first place.
>
>> -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
>> +			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", &pid) == 1 &&
>> +			!strbuf_getwholeline(&locking_host, fp, '\0') &&
>
> I don't think there is anything wrong with using fscanf here, but it has
> enough pitfalls in general that I don't really like its use as a parser
> (and the general lack of it in Git's code base seems to agree).
>
> I wonder if this should just read a line (or the whole file) into a
> strbuf and parse it there. That would better match our usual style, I
> think.

Yeah, I think it would be a good change.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
  2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
  2017-04-18 17:52       ` David Turner
@ 2017-04-19  1:49       ` Junio C Hamano
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-04-19  1:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: René Scharfe; +Cc: David Turner, git, peff, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> writes:

> How important is it to scan the whole file in one call?  We could split
> it up like this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length.  We
> need to be permissive here to allow machines with different values for
> HOST_NAME_MAX to work with the same file on a network file system, so
> this would have to be the first patch, right?

Absolutely.  FWIW, I agree with Peff that we do not need to use
fscanf here; just reading a line into strbuf and picking pieces
would be sufficient.

> NB: That && cascade has enough meat for a whole function.

True, too.

>
> René
>
> ---
>  builtin/gc.c | 10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> index 1fca84c19d..d5e880028e 100644
> --- a/builtin/gc.c
> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -251,10 +251,9 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>  	fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&lock, pidfile_path,
>  				       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
>  	if (!force) {
> -		static char locking_host[128];
> +		static struct strbuf locking_host = STRBUF_INIT;
>  		int should_exit;
>  		fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
> -		memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>  		should_exit =
>  			fp != NULL &&
>  			!fstat(fileno(fp), &st) &&
> @@ -268,9 +267,10 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>  			 * running.
>  			 */
>  			time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
> -			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
> +			fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", &pid) == 1 &&
> +			!strbuf_getwholeline(&locking_host, fp, '\0') &&
>  			/* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
> -			(strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
> +			(strcmp(locking_host.buf, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || errno == EPERM);
>  		if (fp != NULL)
>  			fclose(fp);
>  		if (should_exit) {
> @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* ret_pid)
>  				rollback_lock_file(&lock);
>  			*ret_pid = pid;
>  			free(pidfile_path);
> -			return locking_host;
> +			return locking_host.buf;
>  		}
>  	}

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames
  2017-04-18 17:52       ` David Turner
@ 2017-04-19  3:49         ` Junio C Hamano
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-04-19  3:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Turner; +Cc: 'René Scharfe', git, peff, jrnieder, Duy Nguyen

David Turner <David.Turner@twosigma.com> writes:

> If the writer has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, this will work fine.  If the reader
> has the smaller HOST_NAME_MAX, and the writer's actual value is too long,
> then there's no way the strcmp would succeed anyway.  So I don't think we need
> to worry about it.

Hmph, I have to agree with that reasoning, only because the value we
read into locking_host[] is not used for error reporting at all.  I
would have insisted to read what is on the filesystem anyway if that
were not the case.

Thanks.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2017-04-19  3:49 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-04-17 16:17 [PATCH v2] xgethostname: handle long hostnames David Turner
2017-04-18  1:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-18  1:41   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-18 16:07     ` René Scharfe
2017-04-18 16:17       ` Jeff King
2017-04-19  1:47         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-18 17:52       ` David Turner
2017-04-19  3:49         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-19  1:49       ` Junio C Hamano

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.