You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> on 2018/03/23 13:18:34 UTC
[PATCH] ap_str[case]cmp_match() made tail-recursive
Not sure it helps its readability (not worse though), at least it
helps performances.
For now the patches uses a big "goto" to preserve code (AFAP), that
could easily be turned into a do {} while.
WDYT?
Re: [PATCH] ap_str[case]cmp_match() made tail-recursive
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:39 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Not sure it helps its readability (not worse though), at least it
>>> helps performances.
>>>
>>> For now the patches uses a big "goto" to preserve code (AFAP), that
>>> could easily be turned into a do {} while.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>
>> Did you just reintroduce the fnmatch recursion exploit?
>
> Well, maybe :p
> What was it exactly?
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-0419
Re: [PATCH] ap_str[case]cmp_match() made tail-recursive
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not sure it helps its readability (not worse though), at least it
>> helps performances.
>>
>> For now the patches uses a big "goto" to preserve code (AFAP), that
>> could easily be turned into a do {} while.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> Did you just reintroduce the fnmatch recursion exploit?
Well, maybe :p
What was it exactly?
Re: [PATCH] ap_str[case]cmp_match() made tail-recursive
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not sure it helps its readability (not worse though), at least it
> helps performances.
>
> For now the patches uses a big "goto" to preserve code (AFAP), that
> could easily be turned into a do {} while.
>
> WDYT?
Did you just reintroduce the fnmatch recursion exploit?