Re: [PATCH] trace2: tolerate failed timestamp formatting

Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes:

> Derrick Stolee <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>> Would it make more sense to fix the xsnprintf()/libintl boundary and
>>> treat Trace2 reentrancy separately? I still can't explain why the
>>> allocation failed, so there may be another GfW-specific piece I’m
>>> missing.
>>
>> I think that your suggested change has merits and should be pursued.
>> I'll explore it a bit to confirm.
>
> That band-aid may be a good idea, but I would prefer not to see the
> conditional in a common source file like 'wrapper.c'.  Somewhere
> MinGW-specific would be more appropriate, would it not?

Did anything come out of this discussion?

>
>> The other justification I'd like to make in my patch is that the
>> xsnprintf() calls die() and the trace2 machinery should be die()-free
>> whenever possible. Solving both possible causes is likely the right
>> long-term approach.
>
> That is indeed worth considering.
>
> You mention a few calls to xstrdup() that can potentially abort, and
> I agree that anything that triggers malloc() and notices that we are
> out of memory can probably do little better than to die.  But are
> there other operations that may cause us to exit, even though we are
> not in an unrecoverable state (such as an out-of-memory condition)?
>
> Thanks.