From: Mir Immad <mirimnan017@gmail.com>
To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] analyzer: fix ICE casued by dup2 in sm-fd.cc[PR106551]
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:34:32 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAE1-7ozcRSVH9O1tm52xh-U79uqrp3eUNvdHy8Z4hAaT+b0zHA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bb1237e9d6127594b06d876839c32eafd681de1c.camel@redhat.com>
> if you convert the "int m;" locals into an extern global, like in
> comment #0 of bug 106551, does that still trigger the crash on the
> unpatched sm-fd.cc?
Yes, it does, since m would be in "m_start" state. I'm sending an updated
patch.
Thanks
Immad.
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 1:32 AM David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-08-09 at 21:42 +0530, Immad Mir wrote:
> > This patch fixes the ICE caused by valid_to_unchecked_state,
> > at analyzer/sm-fd.cc by handling the m_start state in
> > check_for_dup.
> >
> > Tested lightly on x86_64.
> >
> > gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
> > PR analyzer/106551
> > * sm-fd.cc (check_for_dup): handle the m_start
> > state when transitioning the state of LHS
> > of dup, dup2 and dup3 call.
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > * gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c: New testcases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Immad Mir <mirimmad@outlook.com>
> > ---
> > gcc/analyzer/sm-fd.cc | 4 ++--
> > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c | 28
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/analyzer/sm-fd.cc b/gcc/analyzer/sm-fd.cc
> > index 8bb76d72b05..c8b9930a7b6 100644
> > --- a/gcc/analyzer/sm-fd.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/analyzer/sm-fd.cc
> > @@ -983,7 +983,7 @@ fd_state_machine::check_for_dup (sm_context
> > *sm_ctxt, const supernode *node,
> > case DUP_1:
> > if (lhs)
> > {
> > - if (is_constant_fd_p (state_arg_1))
> > + if (is_constant_fd_p (state_arg_1) || state_arg_1 ==
> > m_start)
> > sm_ctxt->set_next_state (stmt, lhs,
> > m_unchecked_read_write);
> > else
> > sm_ctxt->set_next_state (stmt, lhs,
> > @@ -1011,7 +1011,7 @@ fd_state_machine::check_for_dup (sm_context
> > *sm_ctxt, const supernode *node,
> > file descriptor i.e the first argument. */
> > if (lhs)
> > {
> > - if (is_constant_fd_p (state_arg_1))
> > + if (is_constant_fd_p (state_arg_1) || state_arg_1 ==
> > m_start)
> > sm_ctxt->set_next_state (stmt, lhs,
> > m_unchecked_read_write);
> > else
> > sm_ctxt->set_next_state (stmt, lhs,
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c
> > index eba2570568f..ed4d6de57db 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-dup-1.c
> > @@ -220,4 +220,30 @@ test_19 (const char *path, void *buf)
> > close (fd);
> > }
> >
> > -}
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > +}
> > +
> > +void
> > +test_20 ()
> > +{
> > + int m;
> > + int fd = dup (m); /* { dg-warning "'dup' on possibly invalid
> > file descriptor 'm'" } */
> > + close (fd);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void
> > +test_21 ()
> > +{
> > + int m;
> > + int fd = dup2 (m, 1); /* { dg-warning "'dup2' on possibly
> > invalid file descriptor 'm'" } */
> > + close (fd);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void
> > +test_22 (int flags)
> > +{
> > + int m;
> > + int fd = dup3 (m, 1, flags); /* { dg-warning "'dup3' on possibly
> > invalid file descriptor 'm'" } */
> > + close (fd);
> > +}
>
> Thanks for the updated patch.
>
> The test cases looked suspicious to me - I was wondering why the
> analyzer doesn't complain about the uninitialized values being passed
> to the various dup functions as parameters. So your test cases seem to
> have uncovered a hidden pre-existing bug in the analyzer's
> uninitialized value detection, which I've filed for myself to deal with
> as PR analyzer/106573.
>
> If you convert the "int m;" locals into an extern global, like in
> comment #0 of bug 106551, does that still trigger the crash on the
> unpatched sm-fd.cc? If so, then that's greatly preferable as a
> regression test, since otherwise I'll have to modify that test case
> when I fix bug 106573.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-10 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-09 16:12 Immad Mir
2022-08-09 20:02 ` David Malcolm
2022-08-10 15:04 ` Mir Immad [this message]
2022-08-10 16:56 ` David Malcolm
2022-08-10 17:21 ` Mir Immad
2022-08-10 18:43 ` David Malcolm
2022-08-11 9:10 ` Mir Immad
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-08-11 9:11 Immad Mir
2022-08-11 14:22 ` David Malcolm
2022-08-10 15:05 Immad Mir
2022-08-09 8:13 Immad Mir
2022-08-09 7:46 Immad Mir
2022-08-09 15:12 ` David Malcolm
2022-08-09 16:14 ` Mir Immad
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAE1-7ozcRSVH9O1tm52xh-U79uqrp3eUNvdHy8Z4hAaT+b0zHA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mirimnan017@gmail.com \
--cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).