git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Stefan Naewe <stefan.naewe@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] revision.c: fix possible null pointer access
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 22:54:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5666000F.8050306@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqegeym25s.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Am 07.12.2015 um 21:31 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Stefan Naewe <stefan.naewe@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> mark_tree_uninteresting dereferences a tree pointer before checking
>> if the pointer is valid. Fix that by doing the check first.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Naewe <stefan.naewe@gmail.com>
>> ---
>
> I still have a problem with "dereferences", as "dereference" is
> about computing an address and accessing memory based on the result,
> and only the first half is happening here.  I can live with "The
> function does a pointer arithmetic on 'tree' before it makes sure
> that 'tree' is not NULL", but in any case, let's queue this as-is
> for now and wait for a while to see if others can come up with a
> more appropriate phrases.

Don't shoo away language lawyers, because this is a pure C language rule 
patch. If this were only about pointer arithmetic, a change would not be 
necessary. But it isn't. The patch corrects a case where the compiler 
can remove a NULL pointer check that we actually want to remain. The 
language rule that gives sufficient room for interpretation to the 
compiler is about dereferencing a pointer. It is irrelevant that an 
address of an object is taken after the dereference and then only 
pointer arithmetic remains---the dereference has already taken place, 
and that cannot occur for a NULL pointer in a valid program. So, the 
phrase "dereference" is precise and correct here.

-- Hannes

>
> Thanks.
>
>>   revision.c | 4 +++-
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
>> index 0fbb684..8c569cc 100644
>> --- a/revision.c
>> +++ b/revision.c
>> @@ -135,10 +135,12 @@ static void mark_tree_contents_uninteresting(struct tree *tree)
>>
>>   void mark_tree_uninteresting(struct tree *tree)
>>   {
>> -	struct object *obj = &tree->object;
>> +	struct object *obj;
>>
>>   	if (!tree)
>>   		return;
>> +
>> +	obj = &tree->object;
>>   	if (obj->flags & UNINTERESTING)
>>   		return;
>>   	obj->flags |= UNINTERESTING;

      reply	other threads:[~2015-12-07 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-03 19:32 [PATCH] revision.c: fix possible null pointer access Stefan Naewe
2015-12-03 20:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-12-03 21:15   ` Stefan Naewe
2015-12-03 21:34   ` Philip Oakley
2015-12-03 22:17     ` Stefan Beller
2015-12-04 15:39     ` Junio C Hamano
2015-12-04 23:32       ` Jeff King
2015-12-05 15:27   ` [PATCH v2] " Stefan Naewe
2015-12-07 20:31     ` Junio C Hamano
2015-12-07 21:54       ` Johannes Sixt [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5666000F.8050306@kdbg.org \
    --to=j6t@kdbg.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=stefan.naewe@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).