Re: [PATCH] Don't pass NULL pointer to error [BZ #24556]

[Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>]

On 5/23/19 9:41 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * H. J. Lu:
> 
>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:20 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> * H. J. Lu:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:02 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> * H. J. Lu:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In function ‘error’,
>>>>>>      inlined from ‘do_one_test’ at bench-strstr.c:149:7,
>>>>>>      inlined from ‘do_test’ at bench-strstr.c:201:5,
>>>>>>      inlined from ‘test_main’ at bench-strstr.c:220:2:
>>>>>> ../include/bits/../../misc/bits/error.h:42:5: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
>>>>>>     42 |     __error_alias (__status, __errnum, __format, __va_arg_pack ());
>>>>>>        |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't this warning wrong for glibc in general (but not for
>>>>> _dl_debug_printf)?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think printing "(null)" for null pointers is a widely-used GNU
>>>>> extension.
>>>>
>>>> Only for limited cases:
>>>>
>>>> [hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$ cat x.c
>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>
>>>> char *p;
>>>>
>>>> int
>>>> main ()
>>>> {
>>>>    printf("null string:%s\n", p);
>>>>    printf ("%s\n", p);
>>>>    return 0;
>>>> }
>>>> [hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$ gcc x.c
>>>> [hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$ ./a.out
>>>> null string:(null)
>>>> Segmentation fault
>>>> [hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$
>>>
>>> Ah, because GCC transforms printf with "%s\n" to puts?  Hmm.
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> We document the printf behavior:
> 
> |    If you accidentally pass a null pointer as the argument for a ‘%s’
> | conversion, the GNU C Library prints it as ‘(null)’.  We think this is
> | more useful than crashing.  But it’s not good practice to pass a null
> | argument intentionally.
> 
> So we should perhaps fix puts to behave in the same way.  (puts isn't
> even annotated with __nonnull today.)

There are two transformations that don't handle null pointers: printf
to puts and sprintf to strcpy (or memcpy).  They have been in GCC since
at least 2005, and in Clang since at least 2011.  I'd rather discourage
relying on the Glibc printf extension than remove the transformations
or suppress the warning.

Martin