From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <Allain.Legacy@windriver.com>
Received: from mail5.wrs.com (mail5.windriver.com [192.103.53.11])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8532B8C
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  9 Mar 2017 16:16:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com
 [147.11.189.40])
 by mail5.wrs.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v29FG1Pb008312
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK);
 Thu, 9 Mar 2017 07:16:02 -0800
Received: from ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com ([fe80::fcbe:9b7:1141:89a1]) by
 ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com ([147.11.189.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0294.000; Thu, 9
 Mar 2017 07:16:01 -0800
From: "Legacy, Allain" <Allain.Legacy@windriver.com>
To: "WILES, ROGER" <roger.k.wiles@intel.com>
CC: "RICHARDSON, BRUCE" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "DUMITRESCU, CRISTIAN
 FLORIN" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "Jolliffe, Ian" <Ian.Jolliffe@windriver.com>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] cfgfile: increase local buffer size for
 max	name and value
Thread-Index: AQHSk4ujU8n7SW57f0ikMyaP6AUIe6GNFhuA//+R5UA=
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:16:01 +0000
Message-ID: <70A7408C6E1BFB41B192A929744D8523968E9F02@ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com>
References: <1488482971-170522-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com>
 <1488482971-170522-6-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com>
 <8258C19A-889A-475B-9F29-33949ABCF8EE@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <8258C19A-889A-475B-9F29-33949ABCF8EE@intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [128.224.140.166]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] cfgfile: increase local buffer size for
 max	name and value
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:16:04 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wiles, Keith [mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 8:46 AM
> Would this change still cause a failure and memory over write if the user
> decides to have very large string. Does the code check the lengths to mak=
e
> sure they are valid and return error?
>=20

The fgets() is bounded by the size of the buffer and the subsequent validat=
ion will raise an error if no newline was detected within the buffer theref=
ore an overly long line will result in a failure.  I have added a test case=
 in the v2 patchset in which I have added a unit test framework for this li=
brary.

	while (fgets(buffer, sizeof(buffer), f) !=3D NULL) {
		char *pos =3D NULL;
		size_t len =3D strnlen(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
		lineno++;
		if ((len >=3D sizeof(buffer) - 1) && (buffer[len-1] !=3D '\n')) {
			printf("Error line %d - no \\n found on string. "
					"Check if line too long\n", lineno);
			goto error1;
		}

Does that satisfy your concern and qualify for you Ack?