Fix gcc 9 build errors for make xcheck.
Commit Message
On 6/17/19 8:11 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>> tst-field.c:52:7: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
>> Please enter the commit message for your changes. Lines starting
>
> Heh, double check your commit message :-)
:-) Removed.
>
>> - char buf[10];
>> + char buf[12];
>
> -MAXINT would be "-2147483648\0" - 12 bytes. Ok.
>
>> - for (int t = 0; t <= 3; t++)
>> + for (int t = 0; t < 3; t++)
>
> Corresponds to:
> static malloc_args tests[3][NUM_ALLOCS];
>
> So OK.
>
>> error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
>> - res, exp_result);
>> + (res == NULL) ? "NULL" : res,
>> + (exp_result == NULL) ? "NULL" : exp_result);
>
> Ok. Do we have a standard for printing NULL? I mean, other unix's
> print "(null)" for example. If we're changing it anyway, a bit of
> consistency would be nice. But OK anyway :-)
Changed all to "(NULL)".
>
>> printf ("FAIL: rewrite \"%s\" -> \"%s\", expected \"%s\"\n",
>> - input, result, expected);
>> + (input == NULL) ? "NULL" : input, result, expected);
>
> We explicitly pass NULL for input at least once, so OK. We never pass
> NULL for expected, but as for test-strcasestr.c, we should protect it
> anyway. We test for result!=NULL so do not need to check that one.
Yes, it does not hurt. Added this check.
> >> error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
>> - result, exp_result);
>> + (result == NULL) ? "NULL" : result,
>> + (exp_result == NULL) ? "NULL" : exp_result);
>
> Ok.
>
>> error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
>> - result, exp_result);
>> + (result == NULL) ? "NULL" : result,
>> + (exp_result == NULL) ? "NULL" : exp_result);
>
> Ok.
>
Bye
Stefan
Comments
On Jun 18 2019, Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
>>> - res, exp_result);
>>> + (res == NULL) ? "NULL" : res,
>>> + (exp_result == NULL) ? "NULL" : exp_result);
>>
>> Ok. Do we have a standard for printing NULL? I mean, other unix's
>> print "(null)" for example. If we're changing it anyway, a bit of
>> consistency would be nice. But OK anyway :-)
> Changed all to "(NULL)".
printf uses "(null)".
Andreas.
commit 04cd33dbc4b080837c40a7dbf5680e2ecb4fae66
Author: Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri Jun 14 12:54:38 2019 +0200
Fix gcc 9 build errors for make xcheck. [BZ #24556]
This patch fixes the following gcc 9 warnings for "make xcheck" / "make bench":
-string/tst-strcasestr.c:
../include/bits/../../misc/bits/error.h:42:5: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
-argp/argp-test.c:
argp-test.c:130:20: error: ‘%d’ directive writing between 1 and 11 bytes into a region of size 10 [-Werror=format-overflow=]
argp-test.c:130:19: note: directive argument in the range [-2147483648, 122]
argp-test.c:130:5: note: ‘sprintf’ output between 2 and 12 bytes into a destination of size 10
-nss/tst-field.c:
tst-field.c:52:7: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
-benchtests/bench-strstr.c:
../include/bits/../../misc/bits/error.h:42:5: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
-benchtests/bench-malloc-simple.c:
bench-malloc-simple.c:93:16: error: iteration 3 invokes undefined behavior [-Werror=aggressive-loop-optimizations]
ChangeLog:
[BZ #24556]
* string/test-strcasestr.c (check_result): Add NULL check.
* nss/tst-field.c (check_rewrite): Likewise.
* benchtests/bench-strstr.c (do_one_test): Likewise.
* string/test-strstr.c (check_result): Likewise.
* argp/argp-test.c (popt): Increase size of buf to 12.
* benchtests/bench-malloc-simple.c (bench):
Do not initialize tests array out of bounds.
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static const char doc[] = "Test program for argp."
static void
popt (int key, char *arg)
{
- char buf[10];
+ char buf[12];
if (isprint (key))
sprintf (buf, "%c", key);
else
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ bench (unsigned long size)
size_t iters = NUM_ITERS;
int **arr = (int**) malloc (MAX_ALLOCS * sizeof (void*));
- for (int t = 0; t <= 3; t++)
+ for (int t = 0; t < 3; t++)
for (int i = 0; i < NUM_ALLOCS; i++)
{
tests[t][i].n = allocs[i];
@@ -147,7 +147,8 @@ do_one_test (impl_t *impl, const char *s1, const char *s2, char *exp_result)
if (res != exp_result)
{
error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
- res, exp_result);
+ (res == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : res,
+ (exp_result == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : exp_result);
ret = 1;
}
}
@@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ check_rewrite (const char *input, const char *expected)
if (result != NULL && strcmp (result, expected) != 0)
{
printf ("FAIL: rewrite \"%s\" -> \"%s\", expected \"%s\"\n",
- input, result, expected);
+ (input == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : input, result,
+ (expected == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : expected);
errors = true;
}
free (to_free);
@@ -67,7 +67,8 @@ check_result (impl_t *impl, const char *s1, const char *s2,
if (result != exp_result)
{
error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
- result, exp_result);
+ (result == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : result,
+ (exp_result == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : exp_result);
ret = 1;
return -1;
}
@@ -66,7 +66,8 @@ check_result (impl_t *impl, const char *s1, const char *s2,
if (result != exp_result)
{
error (0, 0, "Wrong result in function %s %s %s", impl->name,
- result, exp_result);
+ (result == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : result,
+ (exp_result == NULL) ? "(NULL)" : exp_result);
ret = 1;
return -1;
}