On 09/05/2017 04:54 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 01.09.2017 20:03, Eric Blake wrote: >>> Rather than make multiple callers call strlen(), it's easier if >>> socket_send() itself can compute a length via strlen() if none >>> was provided (caller passes -1). Callers that can get at the >>> length more efficiently are left that way. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> tests/libqtest.c | 10 ++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> I have to say that I don't like this idea very much. socket_send() >> should IMHO not know about the type of the data that should be sent, >> i.e. it should not assume that the content is a zero-terminated string. > > I agree.
It doesn't assume that the content is zero-terminated unless you pass a negative length. > >> This also could lead to some hard to detect bugs later in case somebody >> is calling the function like this: >> >> size = someotherfunction(); >> socket_send(fd, buf, size); >> >> ... and the someotherfunction() returned a negative error code instead >> of a correct size. >> >> So I'd like to suggest to simply drop this patch. > > A separate wrapper function for sending zero-terminated strings would be > fine with me. I'm fine dropping the patch; computing the length in the callers is not that much more onerous (there aren't that many), so I don't think another wrapper is needed. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
