[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#2844: infinite loop in boyer_moore()
From: |
Chong Yidong |
Subject: |
bug#2844: infinite loop in boyer_moore() |
Date: |
Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:51:45 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (gnu/linux) |
Ping. Anyone have an opinion?
>> Gnus has been entering infinite loops for me while splitting mail.
>> Today I got a chance to look into it. The problem is in
>> boyer_moore(), in search.c:
>
>> /* Use signed comparison if appropriate
>> to make cursor+infinity sure to be > p_limit.
>> Assuming that the buffer lies in a range of addresses
>> that are all "positive" (as ints) or all "negative",
>> either kind of comparison will work as long
>> as we don't step by infinity. So pick the kind
>> that works when we do step by infinity. */
>> if ((EMACS_INT) (p_limit + infinity) > (EMACS_INT) p_limit)
>> while ((EMACS_INT) cursor <= (EMACS_INT) p_limit)
>> cursor += BM_tab[*cursor];
>> else
>> while ((EMACS_UINT) cursor <= (EMACS_UINT) p_limit)
>> cursor += BM_tab[*cursor];
>
>> it takes the signed (EMACS_INT) loop, but that fails because cursor is
>> (unsigned char *) 0x7fffc440, whereas p_limit is (unsigned char *)
>> 0x80001260.
>
>> infinity, computed earlier in that function, is 0x37dac21, but I don't
>> see how a positive value would have helped. It seems to me that we
>> have to check that we won't be crossing this boundary starting at
>> cursor rather than p_limit, or maybe both. I haven't thought much
>> about it.
>
> Checking with cursor as well as p_limit sounds about right to be, but I
> am far from familiar with this part of the code. Does anyone one this
> list have an opinion?