GNU bug report logs -
#42656
term.c:1405:25: warning: ‘%d’ directive writing between 2 and 10 bytes into a region of size 3
Previous Next
Reported by: noloader <at> gmail.com
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 19:29:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: notabug
Done: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 42656 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 42656 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Sat, 01 Aug 2020 19:29:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
noloader <at> gmail.com
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
.
(Sat, 01 Aug 2020 19:29:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
I think this can be cleared by clamping the argument.
term.c: In function ‘term_get_fkeys_1’:
term.c:1405:25: warning: ‘%d’ directive writing between 2 and 10 bytes
into a region of size 3 [-Wformat-overflow=]
sprintf (fkey, "f%d", i);
^~
term.c:1405:23: note: directive argument in the range [11, 2147483646]
sprintf (fkey, "f%d", i);
^~~~~
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:862:0,
from ../lib/stdio.h:43,
from termchar.h:22,
from term.c:31:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdio2.h:33:10: note:
‘__builtin___sprintf_chk’ output between 4 and 12 bytes into a
destination of size 4
return __builtin___sprintf_chk (__s, __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL - 1,
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Sat, 01 Aug 2020 19:44:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 42656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Aug 01 2020, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> term.c:1405:23: note: directive argument in the range [11, 2147483646]
> sprintf (fkey, "f%d", i);
> ^~~~~
That's clearly a compiler bug. The loop counts i from 11 to 64, so
2147483646 can never happen.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Sun, 09 Aug 2020 23:08:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 42656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> linux-m68k.org> writes:
> On Aug 01 2020, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
>> term.c:1405:23: note: directive argument in the range [11, 2147483646]
>> sprintf (fkey, "f%d", i);
>> ^~~~~
>
> That's clearly a compiler bug. The loop counts i from 11 to 64, so
> 2147483646 can never happen.
Yeah, that clearly seems like a compiler bug? What compiler are you
using?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
Added tag(s) notabug.
Request was from
Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 13 Aug 2020 00:02:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Mon, 17 Aug 2020 23:37:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #16 received at 42656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
I regularly get messages like that from old versions of GCC. It's better to
ignore such messages, as we shouldn't clutter up the code merely to pacify older
(or buggy) compilers.
You can build with --disable-gcc-warnings to suppress the annoyances with older
compilers (if you're building from Git, that is; you shouldn't need to specify
anything if building from a tarball).
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 18 Aug 2020 09:45:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #19 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Mon 17 Aug 2020, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I regularly get messages like that from old versions of GCC. It's better to
> ignore such messages, as we shouldn't clutter up the code merely to pacify
> older (or buggy) compilers.
>
> You can build with --disable-gcc-warnings to suppress the annoyances with
> older compilers (if you're building from Git, that is; you shouldn't need to
> specify anything if building from a tarball).
If the warning regularly generates many false positive results, then
disabling the warning should be be done by default, so an unmodified
tree gives a clean build.
AndyM
Reply sent
to
Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:39:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
noloader <at> gmail.com
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:39:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #24 received at 42656-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> writes:
> I regularly get messages like that from old versions of GCC. It's better to
> ignore such messages, as we shouldn't clutter up the code merely to pacify older
> (or buggy) compilers.
>
> You can build with --disable-gcc-warnings to suppress the annoyances with older
> compilers (if you're building from Git, that is; you shouldn't need to specify
> anything if building from a tarball).
I think the consensus here is that this is a compiler bug that should be
ignored. I'm therefore closing this bug report.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Fri, 28 Aug 2020 06:08:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #27 received at 42656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:43 PM Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> On Aug 01 2020, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> > term.c:1405:23: note: directive argument in the range [11, 2147483646]
> > sprintf (fkey, "f%d", i);
> > ^~~~~
>
> That's clearly a compiler bug. The loop counts i from 11 to 64, so
> 2147483646 can never happen.
Sorry for the late reply.
What I have found is, analysis is catching the case where printf
family returns -1. It is non-obvious, and I think it's a case where a
better message should be supplied.
The best way I have found to handle it is to terminate the string on
failure. This seems to squash the warning in the cases I have
encountered.
#define TERM_PRINTF(buf, len, rc) \
buf[rc < 0 ? 0 : rc >= len ? len-1 : rc] = '\0'
int rc = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%d", n);
TERM_PRINTF(buf, sizeof(buf), rc);
I don't know if it will help in this case since I did not perform the
patch. But it is the first thing I would try if I was working the bug.
Jeff
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#42656
; Package
emacs
.
(Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:28:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #30 received at 42656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Aug 28 2020, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> What I have found is, analysis is catching the case where printf
> family returns -1.
Which printf? And what does that have to do with the value of i?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:24:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 214 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.