Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability
Date
Msg-id 1242426.1707424769@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability
List pgsql-hackers
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:59:54AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I'd put these static inlines into common/int.h. I don't think this is common
>> enough to warrant being in c.h. Probably also doesn't hurt to have a not quite
>> as generic name as INT_CMP, I'd not be too surprised if that's defined in some
>> library.
>>
>> I think it's worth following int.h's pattern of including [s]igned/[u]nsigned
>> in the name, an efficient implementation for signed might not be the same as
>> for unsigned. And if we use static inlines, we need to do so for correct
>> semantics anyway.

> Seems reasonable to me.

+1 here also.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Erik Wienhold
Date:
Subject: Re: Psql meta-command conninfo+
Next
From: Maiquel Grassi
Date:
Subject: RE: Psql meta-command conninfo+