[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Clang doesn't warn about wrong sized mallocs (original) (raw)
Chris Tetreault via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Aug 16 10:11:28 PDT 2021
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] Out-of-tree AA pass used from ModulePass
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Clang doesn't warn about wrong sized mallocs
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
A valid use for malloc(sizeof(Foo) + c) could be if one were writing a custom allocation function. They might be cramming metadata in that trailing area after the space for Foo.
-----Original Message----- From: cfe-dev <cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Joerg Sonnenberger via cfe-dev Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 10:03 AM To: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Clang doesn't warn about wrong sized mallocs
WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:48:54PM +0000, Keane, Erich via cfe-dev wrote:
I think the only valid thing to check here is allocated 'smaller', since:
struct S *s = malloc(sizeof(struct S) * 10); // An array struct S *s2 = malloc(sizeof(struct S) + 5); // a struct with some level of trailing storage, shows that multiple-of isn't sufficient are both valid/reasonably common uses of malloc.
It depends. The former is certainly valid and common, but the latter should only be valid if the last member is a (flexible) array. There are certainly levels of quality here.
Does clang-tidy or clang-analyze complain about multiplicative arguments in general? E.g. malloc(sizeof(S) * len) ?
Joerg
cfe-dev mailing list cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
- Previous message: [llvm-dev] Out-of-tree AA pass used from ModulePass
- Next message: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Clang doesn't warn about wrong sized mallocs
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]