Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 00:53:16 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Increase BUFSIZ to 8192 Message-ID: <20150514075316.GY37063@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <62511.1431589335@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <14994.1431412293@critter.freebsd.dk> <20150513080342.GE37063@funkthat.com> <A1224018-7540-4C76-91EF-AEA2655E49A8@FreeBSD.org> <55530CC3.1090204@selasky.org> <1431528249.1221.15.camel@freebsd.org> <CAJ-VmonL9mT4JLqfSefKYiwv5-ecLkx9RZ5=kXt__%2Bs9iO4%2B9Q@mail.gmail.com> <20150513181347.GM37063@funkthat.com> <1431542835.1221.30.camel@freebsd.org> <20150514072155.GT37063@funkthat.com> <62511.1431589335@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote this message on Thu, May 14, 2015 at 07:42 +0000:
> --------
> In message <20150514072155.GT37063@funkthat.com>, John-Mark Gurney writes:
>
> >Since you apprently missed my original reply, I said that we shouldn't
> >abuse BUFSIZ for this work, and that it should be changed in mdXhl.c...
>
> Say what ?
>
> BUFSIZ is used entirely appropriately in MDXFileChunk(): For reading
> a file into an algorithm.
Posix-2008:
BUFSIZ: Size of <stdio.h> buffers. This shall expand to a positive value.
C99:
BUFSIZ
which expands to an integer constant expression that is the size of
the buffer used by the setbuf function;
In fact, posix-2008 references LINE_MAX because:
Frequently, utility writers selected the UNIX system constant BUFSIZ to
allocate these buffers; therefore, some utilities were limited to 512
bytes for I/O lines, while others achieved 4 096 bytes or greater.
BUFSIZ was already recognized as to small to hold a single line, yet
you're saying it's perfectly fine to use as a buffer for binary data?
> If in stead of open(2), fopen(3) had been used, the exact same thing
> would happen, but using malloc space rather than stack space.
Plus extra overhead.. :)
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150514075316.GY37063>