Flavio Cruz, le mer. 29 nov. 2023 00:28:38 -0500, a ecrit:
> Comparing mach_port_name_t that is MACH_PORT_NAME_DEAD against
> MACH_PORT_DEAD will always return false.
> ---
> ipc/ipc_space.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/ipc/ipc_space.h b/ipc/ipc_space.h
> index 9b199de..3f0eaa0 100644
> --- a/ipc/ipc_space.h
> +++ b/ipc/ipc_space.h
> @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ extern volatile boolean_t mach_port_deallocate_debug;
> static inline void
> ipc_entry_lookup_failed(mach_msg_header_t *msg, mach_port_name_t name)
> {
> - if (name == MACH_PORT_NULL || name == MACH_PORT_DEAD)
> + if (name == MACH_PORT_NAME_NULL || name == MACH_PORT_NAME_DEAD)
> return;
> printf("task %.*s looked up a bogus port %lu for %d, most probably a
> bug.\n", (int) sizeof current_task()->name, current_task()->name, (unsigned
> long) name, msg->msgh_id);
> if (mach_port_deallocate_debug)
Oh, my bad!
Flávio Cruz, le mer. 29 nov. 2023 00:35:06 -0500, a ecrit:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 7:53 PM Samuel Thibault <[1][email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Samuel Thibault, le mer. 29 nov. 2023 00:19:41 +0100, a ecrit:
> > I'm hitting the last assertion, not sure exactly where it is coming from
> yet.
>
> Ok, I missed updating libc :) Now fixed. I'm however getting:
>
> task /sbin/getty(631) looked up a bogus port 4294967295 for 28000, most
> probably a bug.
>
> it seems the extension of MACH_PORT_DEAD doesn't work.
>
>
> Thanks for checking. I think the comparison in gnumach will always be false
> because the name is up-cast to a mach_port_t.
> However, this change does not seem to be a no-op since we haven't seen this
> message before, right?
This message is new, and I missed the _name_t type.
So we're now just missing turning the assert into errors.
Samuel
