On Sun, 27 August 2006 01:04:28 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Like lib/inflate.c (and this new code should arguably be in lib/).
>
> The problem is that if we clean this up, we've diverged very much from the
> upstream implementation. So taking in fixes and features from upstream
> becomes harder and more error-prone.
I've had an identical argument with Linus about lib/zlib_*. He
decided that he didn't care about diverging, I went ahead and changed
the code. In the process, I merged a couple of outstanding bugfixes
and reduced memory consumption by 25%. Looks like Linus was right on
that one.
> I'd suspect that the maturity of these utilities is such that we could
> afford to turn them into kernel code in the expectation that any future
> changes will be small. But it's not a completely simple call.
>
> (iirc the inflate code had a buffer overrun a while back, which was found
> and fixed in the upstream version).
Dito in lib/zlib_*. lib/inflage.c is only used for the various
in-kernel bootloaders to uncompress a kernel image. Anyone tampering
with the image to cause a buffer overrun already owns the machine
anyway.
Whether any of our experiences with zlib apply to lzo remains a
question, though.
Jörn
--
I've never met a human being who would want to read 17,000 pages of
documentation, and if there was, I'd kill him to get him out of the
gene pool.
-- Joseph Costello
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
