mirror of
https://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable.git
synced 2024-12-22 13:33:56 +03:00
build-system: bring back 'nonnull'
Having taken a look at https://github.com/systemd/systemd/runs/645252074?check_suite_focus=true where fuzz-journal-remote failed with ``` AddressSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL ================================================================= ==16==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x000000000000 (pc 0x7f864f98948e bp 0x7ffde5c6b7c0 sp 0x7ffde5c6b560 T0) ==16==The signal is caused by a READ memory access. ==16==Hint: address points to the zero page. SCARINESS: 10 (null-deref) #0 0x7f864f98948e in output_short /work/build/../../src/systemd/src/shared/logs-show.c #1 0x7f864f984624 in show_journal_entry /work/build/../../src/systemd/src/shared/logs-show.c:1154:15 #2 0x7f864f984b63 in show_journal /work/build/../../src/systemd/src/shared/logs-show.c:1239:21 #3 0x4cabab in LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput /work/build/../../src/systemd/src/fuzz/fuzz-journal-remote.c:67:21 #4 0x51fd16 in fuzzer::Fuzzer::ExecuteCallback(unsigned char const*, unsigned long) /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerLoop.cpp:556:15 #5 0x51c330 in fuzzer::Fuzzer::RunOne(unsigned char const*, unsigned long, bool, fuzzer::InputInfo*, bool*) /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerLoop.cpp:470:3 #6 0x523700 in fuzzer::Fuzzer::ReadAndExecuteSeedCorpora(std::__1::vector<fuzzer::SizedFile, fuzzer::fuzzer_allocator<fuzzer::SizedFile> >&) /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerLoop.cpp:765:7 #7 0x5246cd in fuzzer::Fuzzer::Loop(std::__1::vector<fuzzer::SizedFile, fuzzer::fuzzer_allocator<fuzzer::SizedFile> >&) /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerLoop.cpp:792:3 #8 0x4de3d1 in fuzzer::FuzzerDriver(int*, char***, int (*)(unsigned char const*, unsigned long)) /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerDriver.cpp:824:6 #9 0x4cfb47 in main /src/libfuzzer/FuzzerMain.cpp:19:10 #10 0x7f864e69782f in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x2082f) #11 0x41f2a8 in _start (out/fuzz-journal-remote+0x41f2a8) AddressSanitizer can not provide additional info. SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: SEGV /work/build/../../src/systemd/src/shared/logs-show.c in output_short ==16==ABORTING MS: 0 ; base unit: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0x44,0x3d,0xa,0x5f,0x5f,0x52,0x45,0x41,0x4c,0x54,0x49,0x4d,0x45,0x5f,0x54,0x49,0x4d,0x45,0x53,0x54,0x41,0x4d,0x50,0x3d,0x31,0xa,0xa, D=\x0a__REALTIME_TIMESTAMP=1\x0a\x0a artifact_prefix='./'; Test unit written to ./crash-d635b9dd31cceff3c912fd45e1a58d7e90f0ad73 Base64: RD0KX19SRUFMVElNRV9USU1FU1RBTVA9MQoK ``` I was wondering why it hadn't been caught by the compiler even though clang should have failed to compile it with ``` ../src/shared/logs-show.c:624:25: warning: null passed to a callee that requires a non-null argument [-Wnonnull] print_multiline(f, 4 + fieldlen + 1, 0, OUTPUT_FULL_WIDTH, 0, false, ^ ../src/shared/logs-show.c:161:24: note: callee declares array parameter as static here size_t highlight[static 2]) { ^ ~~~~~~~~~~ ../src/shared/logs-show.c:1239:21: warning: null passed to a callee that requires a non-null argument [-Wnonnull] r = show_journal_entry(f, j, mode, n_columns, flags, NULL, NULL, ellipsized); ^ ~~~~ ../src/shared/logs-show.c:1133:30: note: callee declares array parameter as static here const size_t highlight[static 2], ^ ~~~~~~~~~~ 2 warnings generated. ``` Given that judging by https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/13039 it doesn't seem to be the first time issues like that have been missed I think it would be better to turn nonnull on and get around false positives on a case-by-case basis with DISABLE_WARNING_NONNULL .. REENABLE_WARNING Reopens https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6119
This commit is contained in:
parent
fc58c0c7bf
commit
7f3a5eb70e
@ -377,9 +377,6 @@ possible_cc_flags = [
|
||||
'-Wno-error=#warnings', # clang
|
||||
'-Wno-string-plus-int', # clang
|
||||
|
||||
# work-around for gcc 7.1 turning this on on its own.
|
||||
'-Wno-error=nonnull',
|
||||
|
||||
# Disable -Wmaybe-uninitialized, since it's noisy on gcc 8 with
|
||||
# optimizations enabled, producing essentially false positives.
|
||||
'-Wno-maybe-uninitialized',
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user