From: Jeff King Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 12:13:36 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] pkt-line: add functions to read/write flush terminated packet streams Message-ID: <20160927121336.7ftrqw2242tetcf3@sigill.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 02:10:50PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > > That being said, why don't you just use LARGE_PACKET_MAX here? It is > > already the accepted size for feeding to packet_read(), and we know it > > has enough space to hold a NUL terminator. Yes, we may over-allocate by > > 4 bytes, but that isn't really relevant. Strbufs over-allocate anyway. > > TBH in that case I would prefer the "PKTLINE_DATA_MAXLEN+1" solution with > an additional comment explaining "+1". > > Would that be OK for you? > > I am not worried about the extra 4 bytes. I am worried that we make it harder > to see what is going on if we use LARGE_PACKET_MAX. I guess I don't feel to strongly either way. My interest in LARGE_PACKET_MAX is mostly that this is how all the rest of the packet_read() callers behave. -Peff