This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: RFC: __attribute_alloc_size__ on allocation functions (BZ#23741)
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 15:26:45 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFC: __attribute_alloc_size__ on allocation functions (BZ#23741)
- References: <email@example.com> <CAKCAbMgXayegb1pFafYzfoh4ZXH2NYY_2URUehiPAH5=m9hbuQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/9/18 10:36 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 10:11 AM Adhemerval Zanella
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> BZ#23741 suggests glibc adds gcc __attribute_alloc_size__ on malloc functions
>> so asking allocation larger than PTRDIFF_MAX emits a warning that the value
>> exceeds maximum object size.
> I think it makes sense to add the annotations and disallow allocations
> larger than PTRDIFF_MAX for malloc and its family, but *not* for mmap,
> brk, sbrk, and any other hypothetical system memory-allocation
> primitives (IIRC Mach has something else) because those are not
> necessarily used to allocate "objects" in the sense of the C standard,
> and we know from other cases that people don't like it when glibc's
> system call wrappers impose restrictions that the bare system call
I tend to agree. I think the PTRDIFF_MAX limit for malloc only is OK.
I wonder if we can't take advantage of that and gain some bits out
of SIZE|AMP in the chunk header for other uses.