From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp53.i.mail.ru (smtp53.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.113])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00D0B45C304
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Mon, 14 Dec 2020 12:41:16 +0300 (MSK)
References: <20201210161832.729439-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20201210161832.729439-5-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <738d0eec-6ce6-1f24-5d25-e143e96bdd68@tarantool.org>
 <20201212161947.GG544004@grain> <20201212170734.GH544004@grain>
From: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <ade1dbd4-6570-a503-61e4-e09eb6bdc0e0@tarantool.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 12:41:12 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201212170734.GH544004@grain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v4 4/4] crash: report crash data to
	the feedback server
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: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Mons Anderson <v.perepelitsa@corp.mail.ru>, tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>, Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>


12.12.2020 20:07, Cyrill Gorcunov пишет:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 07:19:47PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 03:57:20PM +0300, Serge Petrenko wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * On linux there is new_utsname structure which
>>>> +	 * encodes each field to __NEW_UTS_LEN + 1 => 64 + 1 = 65.
>>>> +	 *
>>>> +	 * So lets just reserve more data in advance: 5 fields
>>>> +	 * 128 bytes each => 640 bytes.
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	static_assert(sizeof(struct utsname) <= 640,
>>>> +		      "utsname is bigger than expected");
>>>
>>> This static assert fails on my mac.
>>> Looks like `struct utsname` is 1280 bytes in size there.
>> Thanks, Serge! I'll force update the size.
> Force pushed the update
> ---
> 	/*
> 	 * Lets reuse tail of the buffer as a temp space.
> 	 */
> 	struct utsname *uname_ptr = (void *)&tail[-sizeof(struct utsname)];
> 	if (p >= (char *)(void *)uname_ptr)
> 		goto out;
>
> 	if (uname(uname_ptr) != 0) {
> 		pr_syserr("uname call failed, ignore");
> 		memset(uname_ptr, 0, sizeof(struct utsname));
> 	}

Thanks for the fix!

LGTM.

-- 
Serge Petrenko