From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com (mail-lj1-f195.google.com
 [209.85.208.195])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64D54469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Tue,  3 Nov 2020 17:09:03 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id 2so19136754ljj.13
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Tue, 03 Nov 2020 06:09:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:08:58 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20201103140858.GI2339@grain>
References: <FBB23D13-1A0D-4C92-918A-EB2995E2CB17@tarantool.org>
 <429b3e4d-490d-ea88-946a-fc0487f9e46a@tarantool.org>
 <20201102131945.GB517@tarantool.org>
 <fd5efc02-a732-ab08-d502-257140674ed6@tarantool.org>
 <20201102211828.GE2339@grain>
 <db9059d8-86a7-8abf-241a-400436d511c3@tarantool.org>
 <20201102214720.GF2339@grain> <20201103135942.GD517@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201103135942.GD517@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] core: fix static_alloc buffer
 overflow
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Sergey Ostanevich <sergos@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 04:59:42PM +0300, Sergey Ostanevich wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I double checked the snprintf fails only if buf is set to NULL _and_ the
> len is set to a non-zero value. 
> 
> So I would follow Vlad's proposal on factoring out the code to make it
> clearer.
> 
> Sergos.

Looks ok to me.