Christopher,
On 4/13/21 2:41 PM, Christopher Faulet wrote:
Sorry for the delay. I'll comment your patches by replying inline when
No delay experienced. You said that you'd try this week and it's still
this week. So this is fine :-)
appropriate. The quality of the whole series is pretty good. Thanks for
the effort. Just a suggestion to simplify the error handling introduced
in the 7th patch. You may use following prototype for your normalizers:
int uri_normalizer_NAME(const struct ist path, struct ist *dst);
returning for instance 0 on success and anything else on error. This
way, it is easy to return an enum instead of an integer to be able to
handle errors.
Yes, I struggled a bit with the method signature, due to the following
constraints:
1. I did not want to allocate the result buffer within the normalizer
itself, because this makes the method less flexible with regard to both
allocation and freeing.
2. I need to somehow pass a size of the target buffer to prevent buffer
overflows.
Thus I can't simply take a `struct ist*` for the destination, as an ist
cannot communicate the size of the underlying buffer. I could
technically take a `struct buffer`, but I'd still like the result to
reside in an ist, because this is what the HTX API expects.
Your suggested signature would work if I would allocate a trash buffer
within the normalizer. Should I do this? Is it safe to return a pointer
to a trash buffer from a function? I remember something about these
buffers being reused, accidentally destroying the contained information
if one is not careful.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
