On Sat, 2022-01-22 at 15:00 -0500, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Saturday, January 22, 2022 6:36:01 AM EST Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> > On 21/01/2022 19:04, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > > Uninitialized variables are a big problem.
> >
> > Yes, but as a package maintainer, I don't want to deal with dozens of
> > crashes after this change.
>
> As much as I don't want this to cause unnecessary work for anyone, I
> also
> don't want to see preventable exploits happen. Nearly all major
> software
> vendors are doing this.
>
> I mentioned in the original proposal that I have a test program with 8
> test
> cases. This is it in case anyone wants to try it out:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> struct test {
> int one;
> int two;
> };
>
> void func2(const struct test *t)
> {
> if (t->one == 0)
> printf("init func2\n");
>
> if (t->two == 0) // Uninitialized 1
> printf("uninit func2\n");
> }
>
> void func1(struct test *t)
> {
> t->one = 1; // two is uninitialized
> func2(t);
> }
>
> int func3(int num)
> {
> if (num) // Uninitialized 2
> return num;
> else
> return 0;
> }
>
> void func4(int *a, int max)
> {
> int i;
> // skip the first
> for (i=1; i<max; i++)
> a[i] = 0;
> }
>
> void func5(const int *a, int max)
> {
> int i;
> for (i=0; i<max; i++) {
> if (a[i]) // Uninitialized 3
> printf("func5: %d\n", i);
> }
> }
>
> int func6(const int *num)
> {
> if (*num) // Uninitialized 4
> return *num;
> else
> return 0;
> }
>
> int j;
> int func7(void)
> {
> return j; // Uninitialized 5
> }
>
> void func8(const int *a, int max)
> {
> int i;
> for (i=0; i<max; i++) {
> if (a[i]) // Uninitialized 6
> printf("func8: %d\n", i);
> }
> }
>
> enum {RED, AMBER, GREEN, BLACK};
>
> int main(void)
> {
> struct test t;
> int num;
> int arry[10];
> int go;
> int color = BLACK;
>
> func1(&t);
> func3(num);
> func4(arry, 10);
> func5(arry, 10);
> func6(&num);
>
> printf("num: %d\n", num); // Uninitialized 7
> printf("func7: %d\n", func7());
> arry[0] = func7(); // copy uninitiliazed j into arry[0]
> func8(arry, 10);
>
> switch (color) {
> case RED:
> case AMBER:
> go = 0;
> break;
> case GREEN:
> go = 1;
> break;
> }
>
> printf("go :%d\n", go); // Uninitialized 8
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> Detection results:
> gcc11 : 0
> gcc11+fanalyzer: 0
> gcc12: 2
> gcc12+fanalyzer: 3
Steve, thanks for putting together these cases.
I've filed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104224
against the gcc analyzer upstream to help me track improving the
analyzer on this.
OK if I go ahead and slurp this into the upstream gcc testsuite?
What optimization level were you running -fanalyzer at? (Unfortunately
the analyzer is currently affected by that; I'm thinking of moving the
analysis pass much earlier so that it isn't).
Running this on Compiler Explorer with gcc trunk with -fanalyzer (no
optimizations) is:
https://godbolt.org/z/T17TbqYdx
Dave
> cppcheck: 2 but describes different aspects of the same problems
> gcc11+asan: 0
> gcc11:+ubsan: 0
> clang13: 1
> valgrind+clang: 0
> valgrind+gcc: 2
> Flexelint: 1
> splint: 2
>
> The one surprising result is that valgrind's results differ by the
> compiler
> choice.
>
> -Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
