[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset dd2c7d497878 by Martin Panter in branch '3.5': Issues #1621, #29145: Test for str.join() overflow https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/dd2c7d497878 New changeset 0c6ea411af17 by Martin Panter in branch 'default': Issue #29145: Merge test from 3.6 https

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: Thanks you all. :-） -- resolution: -> fixed stage: commit review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 09b1cdac74de by Xiang Zhang in branch '3.5': Issue #29145: Fix overflow checks in str.replace() and str.join(). https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/09b1cdac74de New changeset d966ccda9f17 by Xiang Zhang in branch '3.6': Issue #29145: Merge 3.5. https:

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Martin Panter added the comment: Both fixes (join and replace) look good to me. However I don’t think it is necessary to change the exception message in 3.5 or 3.6. -- ___ Python tracker __

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: > FTR I thought the consensus was not to backport these fixes unless there was > a demonstrated problem: , though > personally, I would be in favour of backporting in many cases. Sorry not know that. :-( Another benefi

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Martin Panter added the comment: FTR I thought the consensus was not to backport these fixes unless there was a demonstrated problem: , though personally, I would be in favour of backporting in many cases. Regarding str.join() in unicode.c, see also

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: I committed the patch to 2.7. The new patch is for 3.x. -- stage: patch review -> commit review versions: +Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46221/overflow-checks-3x.patch ___ Pyth

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 29e505526bdd by Xiang Zhang in branch '2.7': Issue #29145: Fix overflow checks in string, bytearray and unicode. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/29e505526bdd -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Python tracker

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: The code in PyUnicode_Join() checks on overflow after making an addition. sz += PyUnicode_GET_LENGTH(item); item_maxchar = PyUnicode_MAX_CHAR_VALUE(item); maxchar = Py_MAX(maxchar, item_maxchar); if (i != 0) sz += se

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: > It seems to me that unicodeobject.c should be changed in 3.x too. I don't understand. Would you mind tell me which part? The only suspicious part to me is `PY_SSIZE_T_MAX >> (rkind - 1)`. It seems should be `PY_SSIZE_T_MAX / rkind`. And I missed jan's patch so

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: It seems to me that unicodeobject.c should be changed in 3.x too. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Py

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: > some instances are present in unicodeobject.c too Thanks for your notification. v3 adds the some changes needed I could find in unicodeobject.c. Nothing in v2 is changed. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46158/replace-overflow-check-v3.patch

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: replace-overflow-check-v2.patch LGTM. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

jan matejek added the comment: some instances are present in unicodeobject.c too -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46156/unicode-overflow.patch ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: > It would be better to write the code in the same form as in 3.x. This could > help backporting other patches if needed. Yes, it is. :-) I only had a fast glance at at 3.x codes and thought they didn't share much. :-( But apparently I was wrong. The new patch ba

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: It would be better to write the code in the same form as in 3.x. This could help backporting other patches if needed. -- nosy: +serhiy.storchaka ___ Python tracker _

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: Ohh sorry I misunderstand your intention. :-( Attach a patch. :-) -- keywords: +patch stage: -> patch review Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46141/replace-overflow-check.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

jan matejek added the comment: No, your changes from issue 27473 are OK. However functions like replace_interleave and replace_single_character etc. still use the broken code: /* use the difference between current and new, hence the "-1" */ /* result_len = self_len + count * (to_len-1) */ pr

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Xiang Zhang added the comment: > It does, but "-fwrapv" is not automatically added when you specify custom OPT > flags. Indeed I think this is why the changes in #27473 and #1621 make sense. > GCC 6 optimizes away broken overflow checks. I am sorry but I don't understand this. What do you mea

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

jan matejek added the comment: It does, but "-fwrapv" is not automatically added when you specify custom OPT flags. I should have clarified that in the original report. -- ___ Python tracker __

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: Does that mean it no longer respects -fwrapv? -- nosy: +benjamin.peterson ___ Python tracker ___

[issue29145] failing overflow checks in replace_*

New submission from jan matejek: Related to http://bugs.python.org/issue1621 and http://bugs.python.org/issue27473 GCC 6 optimizes away broken overflow checks. This leads to segfaults on test_replace_overflow, at least for strings and bytearrays. -- components: Interpreter Core message