This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Alexander Huemer alexander.huemer at xx.vuOn Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 12:49:56PM +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:59:09AM +0200, Alexander Huemer wrote: > > Dear Alexander, > > > Well, as I see it the test against 0xFF is not true under any > > circumstances, as long as the code is not intentionally compiled with > > -funsigned-char. If there is an undesired behavior change because of > > this code change, it's a bug. What's your opinion? > > well, I agree that it is not nice and we can/should change it to a > plain null termination. What I doubt that it is currently a problem > or can you present a smoking gun? No smoking gun that I know of. It's just that the interaction between the piece of code in libosmocore and the piece in openbsc cannot work as the author intended. > int main(int argc, char **argv) > { > signed char a = 0xFF; > signed char b = 0xFF; > > if (a == b) > printf("THE SAME\n"); > return 0; > } Yes, that works of course, but I think my example program better illustrates the current situation in libosmocore and openbsc. In libosmocore a value is assigned which is truncated, in openbsc a comparison is made again that same value and this test returns false, though the intension was to return true. > PS: some ABIs.. e.g. ARM ones.. char will be unsigned. I only tested the patches on x86_64, but '\0' should be safe on all architectures. Kind regards, -Alex