[lttng-dev] Regarding Bug #633 - utils_parse_size_suffix suffers from several problems

[David Goulet]

On 30 Mar (21:57:30), Sandeep K Chaudhary wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> Add the unit tests for the changes. Please have a look at the following
> diff for the changes in unit test file.
> 
> 40,44d39
> <               { "0X400", 1024 },
> <               { "0x40a", 1034 },
> <               { "0X40b", 1035 },
> <               { "0x40e", 1038 },
> <               { "0X40f", 1039 },
> 55c50
> < static char *invalid_tests_inputs[] = { "", "-1", "k", "08", "09",
> "4611686018427387904G" };
> ---
> > static char *invalid_tests_inputs[] = { "", "-1", "k",
> "4611686018427387904G" };

Can you attach a diff patch to the issue please?

Use "git diff" since the default "diff" command output is a bit
unreadable for my passionate git eye :).

Thanks!
David

> 
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> Sandeep.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:22 AM, David Goulet <dgoulet at efficios.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 21 Mar (00:22:57), Sandeep K Chaudhary wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I checked the fix suggested in the bug description and it is correct.
> > >
> > > Changing
> > >
> > > ret = regcomp(&regex,
> > "^\\(0x\\)\\{0,1\\}[0-9][0-9]*\\([kKMG]\\{0,1\\}\\)$", 0);
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > > ret = regcomp(&regex,
> > > "^(((0x|0X)[0-9A-Fa-f]+)|(0[0-7]*)|([1-9][0-9]*))[kKMG]?$",
> > REG_EXTENDED);
> > >
> > > will take care of the following three problems that exist in the first
> > regex
> > >
> > >
> > >    - It accepts a leading 0 (without a following x or X) to represent an
> > >    octal value, but simultaneously accepts the digits 8 and 9 in said
> > octal
> > >    value (this yields -1).
> > >    - It does not support the leading 0X hexadecimal indicator but does
> > >    support a leading 0x (see following).
> > >    - It accepts a leading 0x to represent an hexadecimal value but
> > rejects
> > >    the a..f and A..F digits in said value.
> > >
> > >
> > > Please let me know your views, and then I can submit a patch for this.
> >
> > Unfortunately I don't speak regex well enough to tell you if this is
> > absolutely correct but what you should do with your patch is add unit
> > test(s) that fix the three problems you list here.
> >
> > Most probably in:
> >
> >         tests/unit/test_utils_parse_size_suffix.c
> >
> > Cheers!
> > David
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks and regards,
> > > Sandeep.
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > lttng-dev mailing list
> > > lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> > > http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks and regards,
> Sandeep K Chaudhary.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 603 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/attachments/20140403/e0295953/attachment.sig>