This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] Use PRINTF_FORTIFY instead of _IO_FLAGS2_FORTIFY.
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 09:25:26 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] Use PRINTF_FORTIFY instead of _IO_FLAGS2_FORTIFY.
- References: <20181029121650.24544-1-gabriel@inconstante.eti.br> <20181029121650.24544-8-gabriel@inconstante.eti.br> <24a6e442-e6a2-6127-8e4a-5bbc906cb83e@linaro.org> <87ftw2wbp6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
On 15/11/2018 08:24, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adhemerval Zanella:
>
>>> + if (slen == 0)
>>> + __chk_fail ();
>>
>> Maybe a __glibc_unlikely here?
>
> I don't think this is required for paths which lead to a noreturn
> function.
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
>
Right, so I ok with current change as is.