llvm-project/clang/test/SemaCXX/warn-memset-bad-sizeof.cpp

146 lines
4.7 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

2011-06-15 12:50:13 +08:00
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -Wno-sizeof-array-argument %s
//
extern "C" void *memset(void *, int, unsigned);
extern "C" void *memmove(void *s1, const void *s2, unsigned n);
extern "C" void *memcpy(void *s1, const void *s2, unsigned n);
extern "C" void *memcmp(void *s1, const void *s2, unsigned n);
struct S {int a, b, c, d;};
typedef S* PS;
struct Foo {};
typedef const Foo& CFooRef;
typedef const Foo CFoo;
typedef volatile Foo VFoo;
typedef const volatile Foo CVFoo;
typedef double Mat[4][4];
template <class Dest, class Source>
inline Dest bit_cast(const Source& source) {
Dest dest;
memcpy(&dest, &source, sizeof(dest));
return dest;
}
// http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/c-faq/c-2.html#2-6
void f(Mat m, const Foo& const_foo, char *buffer) {
S s;
S* ps = &s;
PS ps2 = &s;
char arr[5];
char* parr[5];
Foo foo;
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
char* heap_buffer = new char[42];
/* Should warn */
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(&s)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memset(ps, 0, sizeof(ps)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memset(ps2, 0, sizeof(ps2)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memset(ps2, 0, sizeof(typeof(ps2))); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same pointer type}}
memset(ps2, 0, sizeof(PS)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same pointer type}}
memset(heap_buffer, 0, sizeof(heap_buffer)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memset' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memcpy(&s, 0, sizeof(&s)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memcpy' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memcpy(0, &s, sizeof(&s)); // \
Rework the warning for 'memset(p, 0, sizeof(p))' where 'p' is a pointer and the programmer intended to write 'sizeof(*p)'. There are several elements to the new version: 1) The actual expressions are compared in order to more accurately flag the case where the pattern that works for an array has been used, or a '*' has been omitted. 2) Only do a loose type-based check for record types. This prevents us from warning when we happen to be copying around chunks of data the size of a pointer and the pointer types for the sizeof and source/dest match. 3) Move all the diagnostics behind the runtime diagnostic filter. Not sure this is really important for this particular diagnostic, but almost everything else in SemaChecking.cpp does so. 4) Make the wording of the diagnostic more precise and informative. At least to my eyes. 5) Provide highlighting for the two expressions which had the unexpected similarity. 6) Place this diagnostic under a flag: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess This uses the Stmt::Profile system for computing #1. Because of the potential cost, this is guarded by the warning flag. I'd be interested in feedback on how bad this is in practice; I would expect it to be quite cheap in practice. Ideas for a cheaper / better way to do this are also welcome. The diagnostic wording could likely use some further wordsmithing. Suggestions welcome here. The goals I had were to: clarify that its the interaction of 'memset' and 'sizeof' and give more reasonable suggestions for a resolution. An open question is whether these diagnostics should have the note attached for silencing by casting the dest/source pointer to void*. llvm-svn: 133155
2011-06-16 17:09:40 +08:00
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memcpy' call is the same expression as the source}}
memmove(ps, 0, sizeof(ps)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memmove' call is the same expression as the destination}}
memcmp(ps, 0, sizeof(ps)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'memcmp' call is the same expression as the destination}}
/* Shouldn't warn */
memset((void*)&s, 0, sizeof(&s));
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(s));
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(S));
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(const S));
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(volatile S));
memset(&s, 0, sizeof(volatile const S));
memset(&foo, 0, sizeof(CFoo));
memset(&foo, 0, sizeof(VFoo));
memset(&foo, 0, sizeof(CVFoo));
memset(ps, 0, sizeof(*ps));
memset(ps2, 0, sizeof(*ps2));
memset(ps2, 0, sizeof(typeof(*ps2)));
memset(arr, 0, sizeof(arr));
memset(parr, 0, sizeof(parr));
memcpy(&foo, &const_foo, sizeof(Foo));
memcpy((void*)&s, 0, sizeof(&s));
memcpy(0, (void*)&s, sizeof(&s));
char *cptr;
memcpy(&cptr, buffer, sizeof(cptr));
memcpy((char*)&cptr, buffer, sizeof(cptr));
CFooRef cfoo = foo;
memcpy(&foo, &cfoo, sizeof(Foo));
memcpy(0, &arr, sizeof(arr));
typedef char Buff[8];
memcpy(0, &arr, sizeof(Buff));
unsigned char* puc;
bit_cast<char*>(puc);
float* pf;
bit_cast<int*>(pf);
int iarr[14];
memset(&iarr[0], 0, sizeof iarr);
int* iparr[14];
memset(&iparr[0], 0, sizeof iparr);
memset(m, 0, sizeof(Mat));
// Copy to raw buffer shouldn't warn either
memcpy(&foo, &arr, sizeof(Foo));
memcpy(&arr, &foo, sizeof(Foo));
// Shouldn't warn, and shouldn't crash either.
memset(({
if (0) {}
while (0) {}
for (;;) {}
&s;
}), 0, sizeof(s));
}
namespace ns {
void memset(void* s, char c, int n);
void f(int* i) {
memset(i, 0, sizeof(i));
}
}
extern "C" int strncmp(const char *s1, const char *s2, unsigned n);
extern "C" int strncasecmp(const char *s1, const char *s2, unsigned n);
extern "C" char *strncpy(char *det, const char *src, unsigned n);
extern "C" char *strncat(char *dst, const char *src, unsigned n);
extern "C" char *strndup(const char *src, unsigned n);
void strcpy_and_friends() {
const char* FOO = "<- should be an array instead";
const char* BAR = "<- this, too";
strncmp(FOO, BAR, sizeof(FOO)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'strncmp' call is the same expression as the destination}}
strncasecmp(FOO, BAR, sizeof(FOO)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'strncasecmp' call is the same expression as the destination}}
char buff[80];
strncpy(buff, BAR, sizeof(BAR)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'strncpy' call is the same expression as the source}}
strndup(FOO, sizeof(FOO)); // \
// expected-warning {{argument to 'sizeof' in 'strndup' call is the same expression as the source}}
}