[PATCH 2/2] server: Strip terminating '\0' from the registry key name. (Resend)

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Signed-off-by: Dmitry Timoshkov 
---
 dlls/ntdll/tests/reg.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
 server/registry.c      |  2 ++
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/tests/reg.c b/dlls/ntdll/tests/reg.c
index 445c05a02e1..956df02fae4 100644
--- a/dlls/ntdll/tests/reg.c
+++ b/dlls/ntdll/tests/reg.c
@@ -456,6 +456,14 @@ todo_wine
     ok( status == STATUS_OBJECT_TYPE_MISMATCH, "NtOpenKey failed: 0x%08x\n", status );
     pRtlFreeUnicodeString( &str );

+    pRtlCreateUnicodeStringFromAsciiz( &str, "\REGISTRY\Machine\Software\Classes" );
+    str.Length += sizeof(WCHAR); /* include terminating \0 in the length */
+    status = pNtOpenKey( &key, KEY_READ, &attr );
+    ok( status == STATUS_SUCCESS || broken(status == STATUS_OBJECT_NAME_NOT_FOUND) /* win8 */,
+        "NtOpenKey failed: 0x%08x\n", status );
+    if (!status) pNtClose( key );
+    pRtlFreeUnicodeString( &str );
+
     if (!pNtOpenKeyEx)
     {
         win_skip("NtOpenKeyEx not available\n");
@@ -630,13 +638,21 @@ static void test_NtCreateKey(void)
     status = pNtCreateKey( &subkey, am, &attr, 0, 0, 0, 0 );
     ok( status == STATUS_SUCCESS,
         "NtCreateKey failed: 0x%08x\n", status );
-    if (!status) pNtClose( subkey );
+    pNtClose( subkey );
     pRtlFreeUnicodeString( &str );

pRtlCreateUnicodeStringFromAsciiz( &str, "\REGISTRY\MACHINE\SOFTWARE\CLASSES" );
     status = pNtCreateKey( &subkey, am, &attr, 0, 0, 0, 0 );
     ok( status == STATUS_SUCCESS,
         "NtCreateKey failed: 0x%08x\n", status );
+    pNtClose( subkey );
+    pRtlFreeUnicodeString( &str );
+
+    pRtlCreateUnicodeStringFromAsciiz( &str, "\REGISTRY\Machine\Software\Classes" );
+    str.Length += sizeof(WCHAR); /* include terminating \0 in the length */
+    status = pNtCreateKey( &subkey, am, &attr, 0, 0, 0, 0 );
+    ok( status == STATUS_SUCCESS || broken(status == STATUS_OBJECT_PATH_NOT_FOUND) /* win8 */,
+        "NtCreateKey failed: 0x%08x\n", status );
     if (!status) pNtClose( subkey );
     pRtlFreeUnicodeString( &str );

diff --git a/server/registry.c b/server/registry.c
index 2a2bc9a4e68..6a03a41a9de 100644
--- a/server/registry.c
+++ b/server/registry.c
@@ -477,6 +477,8 @@ static inline void get_req_path( struct unicode_str *str )
 {
     str->str = get_req_data();
     str->len = (get_req_data_size() / sizeof(WCHAR)) * sizeof(WCHAR);
+
+    while (str->len && !str->str[str->len / sizeof(WCHAR) - 1]) str->len -= sizeof(WCHAR);
 }

/* return the next token in a given path */

[Alexandre Julliard]

Dmitry Timoshkov  writes:
> @@ -477,6 +477,8 @@ static inline void get_req_path( struct unicode_str *str )
>  {
>      str->str = get_req_data();
>      str->len = (get_req_data_size() / sizeof(WCHAR)) * sizeof(WCHAR);
> -
> - while (str->len && !str->str[str->len / sizeof(WCHAR) - 1]) str->len -= sizeof(WCHAR);

I don't see a test that would justify that while() loop. You should also
test embedded nulls.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Alexandre Julliard  wrote:
> > @@ -477,6 +477,8 @@ static inline void get_req_path( struct unicode_str *str )
> >  {
> >      str->str = get_req_data();
> >      str->len = (get_req_data_size() / sizeof(WCHAR)) * sizeof(WCHAR);
> > -
> > - while (str->len && !str->str[str->len / sizeof(WCHAR) - 1]) str->len -= sizeof(WCHAR);
>
> I don't see a test that would justify that while() loop. You should also
> test embedded nulls.

Is that acceptable to test embedded nulls in a separate patch?

[Alexandre Julliard]

Dmitry Timoshkov  writes:
> Alexandre Julliard  wrote:
> > > @@ -477,6 +477,8 @@ static inline void get_req_path( struct unicode_str *str )
> > >  {
> > >      str->str = get_req_data();
> > >      str->len = (get_req_data_size() / sizeof(WCHAR)) * sizeof(WCHAR);
> > > -
> > > - while (str->len && !str->str[str->len / sizeof(WCHAR) - 1]) str->len -= sizeof(WCHAR);
> >
> > I don't see a test that would justify that while() loop. You should also
> > test embedded nulls.
>
> Is that acceptable to test embedded nulls in a separate patch?

I'm not sure I see why, you need the test to know how to implement it.