qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 11/56] check-qjson: Cover UTF-8 in single quoted


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 11/56] check-qjson: Cover UTF-8 in single quoted strings
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 08:01:02 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:

> On 08/13/2018 01:11 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
>>>>> Technically, Unicode ends at U+10FFFF (21 bits). Anything beyond that
>>>>> is not valid Unicode, even if it IS a valid interpretation of UTF-8
>>>>> encoding.
>>>>
>>>> Correct.  Testing how we handle such sequences makes sense all the same.
>>>>
>>>>>>             {
>>>>>> -            "\"\xF7\xBF\xBF\xBF\"",
>>>>>> +            "\xF7\xBF\xBF\xBF",
>>>>>>                 NULL,               /* bug: rejected */
>>>
>>> So, maybe all the more we need to do is remove the comment (as we WANT
>>> to reject these)?
>>
>> Is PATCH 20 doing what you suggest?
>
> Yes, I think you get there in the end, it was more a question of churn
> in the meantime.

Modest churn, I think.  PATCH 09 adds some ten bug: comments that go
away in "[PATCH 21/56] json: Reject invalid UTF-8 sequences" (some might
go a bit later, didn't check).  I put my announcement of intent "[PATCH
20/56] check-qjson: Document we expect invalid UTF-8 to be rejected"
right before its implementation in PATCH 21.  Having PATCH 20 in place
before PATCH 09 would avoid the bug: comment churn, but it would also
separate announcement of intent from implementation.  Seems doubtful to
me.

>>>>>
>>>>> The conversion of the initializer looks sane (well, mechanical).  Ergo:
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Of course, playing games with the pre-existing comments on
>>> out-of-range behavior is probably better for a separate patch, and you
>>> do have some churn on these tests in later patches. I'll leave it up
>>> to you what to do (or leave put).
>>



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]