| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Mats Kindahl <mats(at)timescale(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability |
| Date: | 2024-02-08 20:39:29 |
| Message-ID: | 1242426.1707424769@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Maiquel Grassi | 2024-02-08 20:47:44 | RE: Psql meta-command conninfo+ |
| Previous Message | Erik Wienhold | 2024-02-08 20:37:54 | Re: Psql meta-command conninfo+ |