Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:50:54 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Checking input parameters of syscalls
Message-ID:	<20010911225054.A1800@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20010910154431 DOT A792 AT dothill DOT com> <20010910222228 DOT X937 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <1297610035 DOT 20010911125836 AT logos-m DOT ru>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<1297610035.20010911125836@logos-m.ru>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.21i

On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 12:58:36PM +0400, egor duda wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Tuesday, 11 September, 2001 Corinna Vinschen cygwin-patches AT cygwin DOT com wrote:
>
>CV> Frankly, I don't know.  My first guess is to prioritize correctness
>CV> over speed ...
>
>[...]
>
>Speaking about correctness. I'm planning yet another update to
>testsuite and found that many cygwin functions still crash when
>application passes an invalid pointer to them, instead of returning
>EFAULT. Should we leave this as it is (to avoid possible slowdown) or
>sprinkle check_null_empty_str and check_null_invalid_struct all
>around? quick testing shows that IsBadWritePtr() function is
>quite fast (~10 microsecinds per call on my K6/400MHz), so i think
>the latter is the right way to go.

Definitely the latter.  There is no reason why cygwin should segv.

Could you add the appropriate checks, Egor?

cgf

- Raw text -