Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Sergey Kaplun <skaplun@tarantool.org>
Cc: Maxim Kokryashkin <max.kokryashkin@gmail.com>,
	tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] test: adapt tests checking loading bytecode files
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 15:43:49 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YgzxhVmzbRwgswbL@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YWVDp9VbdtS4SJFX@root>

Sergey,

On 12.10.21, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Thanks for the fixes!
> 
> On 11.10.21, Максим Корякшин wrote:

<snipped>

> > >> --- FIXME: Loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or "#")
> > >> +-- Loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or "#")
> > >> -- is disabled for security reasons since LuaJIT-2.0.0-beta10.
> > >> -- For more information see comment for `lj_lex_setup()`
> > >> -- in <src/lj_lex.c>.
> > >> -- Also see commit 53a285c0c3544ff5dea7c67b741c3c2d06d22b47
> > >> -- (Disable loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or #!).).
> > >> -- See also  https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/5691 .
> > >> --- The test is disabled for LuaJIT.
> > >> -prepfile("#comment with a binary file\n"..string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > >> --- RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > >> --- checkout("1\n")
> > >> -
> > >> -prepfile("#comment with a binary file\r\n"..string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > >> --- FIXME: Behavior is different for LuaJIT. See the comment above.
> > >> --- The test is disabled for LuaJIT.
> > >> --- RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > >> --- checkout("1\n")
> > >> +-- The test is adapted to LuaJIT behavior.
> > >> +prepfile(string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > >> +RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > >> +checkout("1\n")
> > >
> > >May be it is better to test `NoRun()` for 1 binary file with a comment at the
> > >first string and `Run()` for another binary file without the comment.
> 
> What are your thoughts about this idea?

What are you going to check with this? To check whether unsafe bytecode
loading is still disabled?

> 

<snipped>

> -- 
> Best regards,
> Sergey Kaplun

-- 
Best regards,
IM

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-16 12:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-24 14:28 Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches
2021-10-11 14:25 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2021-10-11 20:02   ` Максим Корякшин via Tarantool-patches
2021-10-12  8:13     ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2022-02-16 12:43       ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2022-02-17  8:57         ` Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches
2022-02-17  9:51         ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2022-02-16 12:43     ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches
2022-02-17 16:38 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YgzxhVmzbRwgswbL@tarantool.org \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=imun@tarantool.org \
    --cc=max.kokryashkin@gmail.com \
    --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \
    --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] test: adapt tests checking loading bytecode files' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox