|
Message-ID: <4DE043DA.1020104@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 02:37:46 +0200 From: Luka Marčetić <paxcoder@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Weekly reports: A On 05/24/2011 03:13 AM, Rich Felker wrote: >> > For "low and high byte content", I suggest that you include ability to >> > test all byte values (for non-wide chars). glibc and many other libc's >> > include implementations of string functions that use adds/bitmasks; >> > these might contain bugs that only show up with specific byte values in >> > specific character positions when the libc is built for specific CPUs. >> > I agree. I don't believe any such issues affect the current C > implementations in musl, but it would be nice to have the tests in > place in case anyone wants to add arch-specific asm versions. > Hey guys. I would just like to point out that the above, combined with the "all alignments" requirement from the wiki means I'm essentially brute-forcing string.h functions. While I generally dislike the idea, it's a.. thorough approach.. I guess. As a slight remedy I'll "brute force" with smaller buffers, and only do basic tests with huge ones. I hope that won't miss the point then. Will report how mmaping more than a single GiB goes (1 is what I have). Good night, -Luka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.