Fix/lround overflow #91
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Previously overflow was not checked, so lround could return a negative value if the rate was too fast, which would then segfault later on.
Fixes b20cede breaking backwards compatibility
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Previously progress would not check the
errnofor a possible overflow after callinglround(), so if the rate was very high you would get negative numbers inbytesand a NaN after taking the log, which would segfault. This was the cause of tidyverse/vroom#103.I think this was only manifesting itself on Windows because
longis still 32 bit there, so it was more likely to occur, but it could I guess also happen on systems with 64 bit log if the rate was high enough I guess.My previous PR also broke backwards compatibility, so I added a commit to fix that.
Fixes tidyverse/vroom#103