Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:30:04 GMT From: Dan Lukes <dan@obluda.cz> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/83347: [patch] improper handling of malloc failures within libc's vfprintf Message-ID: <200712170930.lBH9U444018127@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/83347; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Dan Lukes <dan@obluda.cz> To: das@freebsd.org Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/83347: [patch] improper handling of malloc failures within libc's vfprintf Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:26:04 +0100 Sure ? Pointer value of 0 is nothing "magic" for hardware - it's legal to write to memory offset 0 unless blocked by explicit configuration. It's OS decision to block writes to offset 0. Are you sure it's true for all supported platforms ? Yes, I know it's valid for i386/AMD. In advance - did you tried in even on platforms that will be supported in the future ? In my humble opinion, the one abort() in that special case, even if just for sure, has value. > This situation can only arise if the > programmer has asked printf() to handle a very long and bizarre series > of positional arguments after exhausting all available virtual memory, > so hopefully this won't be a big deal. It's normal that exceptions occur rare. Despite of it, the nice programmers shall handle it. As you just closed the case I understand your don't want discussion about it. No problem - you are commiter - it's your sovereign decision. Sincerely Dan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200712170930.lBH9U444018127>