← 输入框|github.com|刷新
Skip to content

gh-160708: Use the type size for resized ctypes simple objects - #160720

Open
iamsaugatpandey wants to merge 1 commit into
python:mainfrom
iamsaugatpandey:gh-160708-ctypes-resized-simple
Open

iamsaugatpandey wants to merge 1 commit into
python:mainfrom
iamsaugatpandey:gh-160708-ctypes-resized-simple

Conversation

@iamsaugatpandey

@iamsaugatpandey iamsaugatpandey commented Oct 26, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

After ctypes.resize(), the buffer of a simple ctypes object is bigger than the type itself. Two places still used the buffer size (b_size) where they needed the type size:

  • Simple_bool_impl() compared b_size bytes against a 16-byte zero string literal. For a resized object it reads past the literal, and it can also return the wrong answer (bool(c_int(0)) is True if the extra space isn't zero).
  • PyCSimpleType_paramfunc() copied b_size bytes into PyCArgObject.value, which is a fixed-size union, so passing a resized object to a foreign function overwrote the heap.

Both now use info->size, the same as the value getter since gh-159739. bool() checks the value's bytes in a loop instead of comparing with the literal. This also covers simple types larger than 16 bytes, such as c_longdouble_complex on x86-64.

Tests: bool() on a resized c_int whose extra space is non-zero, a call to tf_i with a resized c_int, and bool() on the complex types.

After ctypes.resize(), a simple object's buffer is larger than its
type. bool() and passing the object to a foreign function still used
the buffer size, so bool() read past a 16-byte string literal and the
call copied the whole buffer into the fixed-size PyCArgObject value,
corrupting the heap.

Use the type's size instead, like the value getter does since
pythongh-159739. bool() now checks the value's bytes directly, which also
covers simple types larger than 16 bytes such as c_longdouble_complex
on x86-64.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has insufficient remaining quota.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants