From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38ADC1F6BF for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 18:43:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756612AbcIFSnY (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:43:24 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:38969 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755486AbcIFSnX (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:43:23 -0400 Received: (qmail 24863 invoked by uid 109); 6 Sep 2016 18:43:23 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 18:43:23 +0000 Received: (qmail 28937 invoked by uid 111); 6 Sep 2016 18:43:30 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 14:43:30 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 06 Sep 2016 14:43:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:43:20 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Demonstrate a problem: our pickaxe code assumes NUL-terminated buffers Message-ID: <20160906184320.lzg5jizpw2kbzf72@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 05:45:02PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Typically, on Linux the test passes. On Windows, it fails virtually > every time due to an access violation (that's a segmentation fault for > you Unix-y people out there). And Windows would be correct: the > regexec() call wants to operate on a regular, NUL-terminated string, > there is no NUL in the mmap()ed memory range, and it is undefined > whether the next byte is even legal to access. > > When run with --valgrind it demonstrates quite clearly the breakage, of > course. > > So we simply mark it with `test_expect_success` for now. I'd prefer if this were marked as expect_failure. It fails reliably for me on Linux, even without --valgrind. But even if that were not so, there is no reason to hurt bisectability of somebody running with "--valgrind" (not when it costs so little to mark it correctly). -Peff