[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
[or-cvs] r17888: {tor} Another round of downgrading removing or postponing XXXX021 (tor/trunk/src/or)
Author: nickm
Date: 2009-01-04 14:47:21 -0500 (Sun, 04 Jan 2009)
New Revision: 17888
Modified:
tor/trunk/src/or/config.c
tor/trunk/src/or/connection_edge.c
tor/trunk/src/or/directory.c
tor/trunk/src/or/dirserv.c
tor/trunk/src/or/routerlist.c
tor/trunk/src/or/test.c
Log:
Another round of downgrading removing or postponing XXXX021 issues. Some remain, though.
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/config.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/config.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/config.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -3512,7 +3512,7 @@
"a non-default set of DirServers.");
}
- /*XXXX021 checking for defaults manually like this is a bit fragile.*/
+ /*XXXX022 checking for defaults manually like this is a bit fragile.*/
/* Keep changes to hard-coded values synchronous to man page and default
* values table. */
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/connection_edge.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/connection_edge.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/connection_edge.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -504,7 +504,7 @@
/** Tell any AP streams that are waiting for a onehop tunnel to
* <b>failed_digest</b> that they are going to fail. */
-/* XXX021 We should get rid of this function, and instead attach
+/* XXX022 We should get rid of this function, and instead attach
* onehop streams to circ->p_streams so they get marked in
* circuit_mark_for_close like normal p_streams. */
void
@@ -2294,7 +2294,7 @@
* certain errors or for values that didn't come via DNS. <b>expires</b> is
* a time when the answer expires, or -1 or TIME_MAX if there's a good TTL.
**/
-/* XXXX021 the use of the ttl and expires fields is nutty. Let's make this
+/* XXXX022 the use of the ttl and expires fields is nutty. Let's make this
* interface and those that use it less ugly. */
void
connection_ap_handshake_socks_resolved(edge_connection_t *conn,
@@ -2828,7 +2828,7 @@
connection_edge_is_rendezvous_stream(edge_connection_t *conn)
{
tor_assert(conn);
- if (conn->rend_data) /* XXX */ /* XXXX Why is this XXX? -NM */
+ if (conn->rend_data)
return 1;
return 0;
}
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/directory.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/directory.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/directory.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -342,7 +342,7 @@
if (!get_via_tor) {
if (options->UseBridges && type != BRIDGE_AUTHORITY) {
/* want to ask a running bridge for which we have a descriptor. */
- /* XXX021 we assume that all of our bridges can answer any
+ /* XXX022 we assume that all of our bridges can answer any
* possible directory question. This won't be true forever. -RD */
/* It certainly is not true with conditional consensus downloading,
* so, for now, never assume the server supports that. */
@@ -2606,7 +2606,7 @@
ssize_t estimated_len = 0;
smartlist_t *items = smartlist_create();
smartlist_t *dir_items = smartlist_create();
- int lifetime = 60; /* XXXX021 should actually use vote intervals. */
+ int lifetime = 60; /* XXXX022 should actually use vote intervals. */
url += strlen("/tor/status-vote/");
current = !strcmpstart(url, "current/");
url = strchr(url, '/');
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/dirserv.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/dirserv.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/dirserv.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -1873,8 +1873,8 @@
if (platform && !strcmpstart(platform, "Tor ")) {
const char *eos = find_whitespace(platform+4);
if (eos && !strcmpstart(eos, " (r")) {
- /* XXXX021 Unify this logic with the other version extraction
- * logic */
+ /* XXXX Unify this logic with the other version extraction
+ * logic in routerparse.c. */
eos = find_whitespace(eos+1);
}
if (eos) {
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/routerlist.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/routerlist.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/routerlist.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -1719,7 +1719,7 @@
}
}
- /* XXXX021 this is a kludge to expose these values. */
+ /* XXXX022 this is a kludge to expose these values. */
sl_last_total_weighted_bw = total_bw;
log_debug(LD_CIRC, "Total weighted bw = "U64_FORMAT
@@ -3081,7 +3081,7 @@
int inserted;
(void)from_fetch;
if (msg) *msg = NULL;
- /*XXXX021 Do something with msg */
+ /*XXXX022 Do something with msg */
inserted = extrainfo_insert(router_get_routerlist(), ei);
Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/test.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/test.c 2009-01-04 19:47:17 UTC (rev 17887)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/test.c 2009-01-04 19:47:21 UTC (rev 17888)
@@ -4338,8 +4338,9 @@
crypto_free_cipher_env(cipher);
cipher = NULL;
test_eq(encrypted_size, 16 + 1);
- tor_assert(encrypted_size > 0); /*XXXX021 Obviously this is true. But does
- * this make Coverity happy? */
+ tor_assert(encrypted_size > 0); /* This is obviously true, since 17 is
+ * greater than 0, but its truth is not
+ * obvious to all analysis tools. */
cipher = crypto_create_init_cipher(key1, 0);
decrypted_size = crypto_cipher_decrypt_with_iv(cipher, decrypted1, 1,
encrypted1, encrypted_size);