clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(dst) >= 4); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
}
-void strcat_symbolic_src_length(char *src) {
- char dst[8] = "1234";
- strcat(dst, src);
- clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(dst) >= 4); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
-}
-
void strcat_symbolic_dst_length_taint(char *dst) {
scanf("%s", dst); // Taint data.
strcat(dst, "1234");
clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(x) > 4); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}
}
-void strncpy_exactly_matching_buffer2(char *y) {
- if (strlen(y) >= 4)
- return;
-
- char x[4];
- strncpy(x, y, 4); // no-warning
-
- // This time, we know that y fits in x anyway.
- clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(x) <= 3); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
-}
-
void strncpy_zero(char *src) {
char dst[] = "123";
strncpy(dst, src, 0); // no-warning
void strncasecmp_embedded_null () {
clang_analyzer_eval(strncasecmp("ab\0zz", "ab\0yy", 4) == 0); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
}
+
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===
+// FIXMEs
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===
+
+// The analyzer_eval call below should evaluate to true. We are being too
+// aggressive in marking the (length of) src symbol dead. The length of dst
+// depends on src. This could be explicitely specified in the checker or the
+// logic for handling MetadataSymbol in SymbolManager needs to change.
+void strcat_symbolic_src_length(char *src) {
+ char dst[8] = "1234";
+ strcat(dst, src);
+ clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(dst) >= 4); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}
+}
+
+// The analyzer_eval call below should evaluate to true. Most likely the same
+// issue as the test above.
+void strncpy_exactly_matching_buffer2(char *y) {
+ if (strlen(y) >= 4)
+ return;
+
+ char x[4];
+ strncpy(x, y, 4); // no-warning
+
+ // This time, we know that y fits in x anyway.
+ clang_analyzer_eval(strlen(x) <= 3); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}
+}