Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib: fix byte order test in libsha1.c

diff --git a/90/8aba6d36c097e5bf9d1ea222ba9bca52ae99ed b/90/8aba6d36c097e5bf9d1ea222ba9bca52ae99ed
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..1d3a851
--- /dev/null
+++ b/90/8aba6d36c097e5bf9d1ea222ba9bca52ae99ed
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+Return-Path: <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 139AF431FD6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 01:43:56 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id ualoOlGisgvV for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Mon, 25 Nov 2013 01:43:45 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (guru.guru-group.fi [46.183.73.34])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91367431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 01:43:45 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (localhost [IPv6:::1])\r
+       by guru.guru-group.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA6D010005E;\r
+       Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:43:37 +0200 (EET)\r
+From: Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>\r
+To: david@tethera.net, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib: fix byte order test in libsha1.c\r
+In-Reply-To: <1385328583-24602-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>\r
+References: <m2ob593g55.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>\r
+       <1385328583-24602-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+175~g19e97d6 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)\r
+X-Face: HhBM'cA~<r"^Xv\KRN0P{vn'Y"Kd;zg_y3S[4)KSN~s?O\"QPoL\r
+       $[Xv_BD:i/F$WiEWax}R(MPS`^UaptOGD`*/=@\1lKoVa9tnrg0TW?"r7aRtgk[F\r
+       !)g;OY^,BjTbr)Np:%c_o'jj,Z\r
+Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:43:37 +0200\r
+Message-ID: <m2mwkserzq.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:43:56 -0000\r
+\r
+On Sun, Nov 24 2013, david@tethera.net wrote:\r
+\r
+> From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+>\r
+> Previously PLATFORM_BYTE_ORDER and IS_LITTLE_ENDIAN were not defined,\r
+> so the little endian code was always compiled in.\r
+>\r
+> This will have the effect that the "SHA1s" on big endian architectures\r
+> will change (i.e. become actual sha1s). So someone re-indexing their\r
+> database could conceivable lose tags on messages without a message-id\r
+> header.\r
+> ---\r
+>  lib/libsha1.c | 14 ++++++++++----\r
+>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)\r
+>\r
+> diff --git a/lib/libsha1.c b/lib/libsha1.c\r
+> index 5d16f6a..794854b 100644\r
+> --- a/lib/libsha1.c\r
+> +++ b/lib/libsha1.c\r
+> @@ -49,11 +49,17 @@ extern "C"\r
+>  \r
+>  #define bswap_32(x) ((rotr32((x), 24) & 0x00ff00ff) | (rotr32((x), 8) & 0xff00ff00))\r
+>  \r
+> -#if (PLATFORM_BYTE_ORDER == IS_LITTLE_ENDIAN)\r
+> -#define bsw_32(p,n) \\r
+> -    { int _i = (n); while(_i--) ((uint32_t*)p)[_i] = bswap_32(((uint32_t*)p)[_i]); }\r
+> +#ifdef __BYTE_ORDER__\r
+> +#  if (__BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__)\r
+> +#    define bsw_32(p,n) \\r
+> +       { int _i = (n); while(_i--) ((uint32_t*)p)[_i] = bswap_32(((uint32_t*)p)[_i]); }\r
+> +#  elif (__BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__)\r
+> +#    define bsw_32(p,n)\r
+> +#  else\r
+> +#    error "unknown byte order"\r
+> +#  endif\r
+>  #else\r
+> -#define bsw_32(p,n)\r
+> +#    error "macro __BYTE_ORDER__ is not defined"\r
+>  #endif\r
+\r
+LGTM. \r
+\r
+When you modify te NEWS entry by adding instructions how to find\r
+out those sha1's of message-id:s that are affected (Austin's code)\r
+You could perhaps add note of the origin of these macros\r
+(i.e. something like \r
+/* These "Common Predefined Macros" below are GNU C extensions */ )\r
+\r
+See http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Common-Predefined-Macros.html\r
+for reference.\r
+\r
+Tomi\r
+\r
+>  \r
+>  #define SHA1_MASK   (SHA1_BLOCK_SIZE - 1)\r
+> -- \r
+> 1.8.4.2\r