lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Smackv10: Smack rules grammar + their stateful parser(2)
    ...
    > I've double-checked the code for any possible off-by-one/overflow
    > errors.
    ...

    Two things caught my eye.

    ...
    > + case bol:
    > + case subject:
    > + if (*label_len >= SMK_MAXLEN)
    > + goto out;
    > + subjectstr[(*label_len)++] = data[i];

    Why is the '>' necessary? Could it happen that you had incremented past the
    point of equality?

    If that could not happen, then in my oppinion '>=' is very misleading when '=='
    is really what is needed.

    ...
    > + case object:
    > + if (*prevstate == blank) {
    > + subjectstr[*label_len] = '\0';
    > + *label_len = 0;
    > + }

    I wonder why it is valid to uncritically use the already incremented label_len
    here, without checking its value (like is done above).

    It seems strangely asymmetrical. I'm not saying it's wrong, because there may
    be a subtle reason as to why it's not, but if that's the case then I think that
    subtle reason should be documented with a comment.

    ...
    > + case access:
    > + if (*prevstate == blank) {
    > + objectstr[*label_len] = '\0';
    > + *label_len = 0;
    > + }

    Same applies here.


    --

    / jakob

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-10 18:33    [W:0.025 / U:61.816 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site