Re: strange cppcheck finding

2018-03-20 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 03:05:12PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 06:45:08PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > "UB" stands for undefined behaviour. that's the reason why cppcheck is > > unhappy. > > how do that properly - that's the question :) > > The thing is that I'm not awa

Re: strange cppcheck finding

2018-03-20 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 06:45:08PM +0500, ??? wrote: > "UB" stands for undefined behaviour. that's the reason why cppcheck is > unhappy. > how do that properly - that's the question :) The thing is that I'm not aware of any other way to safely detect integer overflows, it's always done li

Re: strange cppcheck finding

2018-03-20 Thread Илья Шипицин
"UB" stands for undefined behaviour. that's the reason why cppcheck is unhappy. how do that properly - that's the question :) 2018-03-20 10:48 GMT+05:00 Willy Tarreau : > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 06:55:46PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > (it's master) > > > > is it in purpose ? > > > > [src/ssl_so

Re: strange cppcheck finding

2018-03-19 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 06:55:46PM +0500, ??? wrote: > (it's master) > > is it in purpose ? > > [src/ssl_sock.c:1553]: (warning) Invalid test for overflow > 'msg+rec_len overflow is UB. The code is : rec_len = (msg[0] << 8) + msg[1]; msg += 2; if (msg + rec_len

strange cppcheck finding

2018-03-19 Thread Илья Шипицин
(it's master) is it in purpose ? [src/ssl_sock.c:1553]: (warning) Invalid test for overflow 'msg+rec_len