Re: c/4967: GCC should warn about obvious violations of restrict

["Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>]

The following reply was made to PR c/4967; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
To: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
Cc: <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,  <ma@suse.de>,  <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>, 
     <schwab@suse.de>
Subject: Re: c/4967: GCC should warn about obvious violations of restrict
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:29:00 +0000 (GMT)

 On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
 
 > whether a call is defined or not.  A call sprintf_restrict (buf, buf)
 > would only be undefined when the function writes to both pointers but
 > this cannot be detected at the call side for e.g. library
 > functions:-(.
 
 Only when it writes to the same object via one pointer as it accesses by
 the other, indeed.  Adding 25 to the second pointer, then copying 25 bytes
 from the first to the second, or something more complicated where each
 byte is only accessed via one of the pointers, would still be OK.
 
 You could always work out some way to annotate function declarations with
 information about how much is read or written from each argument and
 whether aliasing is OK (note that the restrict qualifiers in declarations
 not part of the definition are still irrelevant and are effectively
 ignored (6.7.5.3#15), but you could define them to be relevant in
 interpreting such an attribute).  I'd like to get -Wformat-security to
 warn about sprintf into fixed-length buffers that might be too short for
 the format, and similar such possible security holes.
 
 -- 
 Joseph S. Myers
 jsm28@cam.ac.uk