================
@@ -1601,6 +1601,23 @@ void
Sema::checkFortifiedBuiltinMemoryFunction(FunctionDecl *FD,
BufferSize = Checker.ComputeSizeArgument(0);
break;
}
+ case Builtin::BIrealpath: {
+ BufferSize = Checker.ComputeSizeArgument(1);
+ if (!BufferSize)
+ return;
+ const llvm::Triple &T = Context.getTargetInfo().getTriple();
+ uint64_t PathMax = 0;
+ if (T.isOSLinux() || T.isOSFuchsia() || T.isOSAIX() || T.isOSHaiku())
+ PathMax = 4096;
+ else if (T.isOSDarwin() || T.isOSFreeBSD() || T.isOSNetBSD() ||
+ T.isOSOpenBSD() || T.isOSSolaris())
+ PathMax = 1024;
+ else
+ return;
----------------
enh-google wrote:
yeah, the sensible way to use realpath() is to pass null and let it allocate
for you, but that's why the check here is "at least" PATH_MAX, right?
"it's not what we _want_ to say, but it's the best that we _can_ say".
(having been generally quite opinionated in bionic's headers though, i do think
there's a case to be made for the warning favoring using null instead. although
you then have a similar problem to your current "what's the value of PATH_MAX
on the _target_ OS?" for "does the target OS support a null second argument?".)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/230695
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
