This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
Cc: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>, Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 02 Jun 2005 11:15:25 -0600
Subject: Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
References: <429E3E31.4000503@redhat.com> <429E3F00.1070406@avtrex.com><429E40E4.2050506@redhat.com> <429E48D7.20404@bothner.com><m3ekblcz45.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <429F1C60.5010504@redhat.com><17055.15770.865637.627174@zapata.pink>
Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com

Andrew> That's true.  However, it would be possible to solve this problem
Andrew> entirely by zeroing stack-allocated buffers.  From what I've seen of
Andrew> the overhead of conservatively scanning the stacks, this would
Andrew> probably be worthwhile.

BTW there was a recent thread about this on the main gcc list.

Tom

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Andrew Haley

References:
- Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: David Daney
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
  - From: Andrew Haley

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]