[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