[bugfix] Range filter: more appropriate restriction on max ranges.

Maxim Dounin mdounin at mdounin.ru
Thu Nov 9 14:18:45 UTC 2017


Hello!

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 06:48:52PM +0800, 胡聪 (hucc) wrote:

> # HG changeset patch
> # User hucongcong <hucong.c at foxmail.com>
> # Date 1509099660 -28800
> #      Fri Oct 27 18:21:00 2017 +0800
> # Node ID b9850d3deb277bd433a689712c40a84401443520
> # Parent  9ef704d8563af4aff6817ab1c694fb40591f20b3
> Range filter: more appropriate restriction on max ranges.
> 
> diff -r 9ef704d8563a -r b9850d3deb27 src/http/modules/ngx_http_range_filter_module.c
> --- a/src/http/modules/ngx_http_range_filter_module.c	Tue Oct 17 19:52:16 2017 +0300
> +++ b/src/http/modules/ngx_http_range_filter_module.c	Fri Oct 27 18:21:00 2017 +0800
> @@ -369,6 +369,11 @@ ngx_http_range_parse(ngx_http_request_t 
>      found:
>  
>          if (start < end) {
> +
> +            if (ranges-- == 0) {
> +                return NGX_DECLINED;
> +            }
> +
>              range = ngx_array_push(&ctx->ranges);
>              if (range == NULL) {
>                  return NGX_ERROR;
> @@ -383,10 +388,6 @@ ngx_http_range_parse(ngx_http_request_t 
>  
>              size += end - start;
>  
> -            if (ranges-- == 0) {
> -                return NGX_DECLINED;
> -            }
> -
>          } else if (start == 0) {
>              return NGX_DECLINED;
>          }

There is no real difference, and the current code looks slightly 
more readable for me, so I would rather leave it as is.

-- 
Maxim Dounin
http://mdounin.ru/


More information about the nginx-devel mailing list