https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108251

--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm <dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Adding  -fanalyzer-verbosity=3 to comment #2, I get:

../../src/null-deref-pr108251-smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early.c: In function
‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’:
../../src/null-deref-pr108251-smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early.c:92:27: warning:
dereference of NULL ‘0’ [CWE-476] [-Wanalyzer-null-dereference]
   92 |  smp->data.u.sint = ((conn->flags & CO_FL_EARLY_DATA) &&
      |                       ~~~~^~~~~~~
  ‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’: events 1-2
    |
    |   78 | smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early(const struct arg *args, struct sample
*smp, const char *kw, void *private)
    |      | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    |      | |
    |      | (1) entry to ‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’
    |......
    |   83 |  conn = objt_conn(smp->sess->origin);
    |      |         ~
    |      |         |
    |      |         (2) inlined call to ‘objt_conn’ from
‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’
    |
    +--> ‘objt_conn’: event 3
           |
           |   63 |  if (!t || *t != OBJ_TYPE_CONN)
           |      |     ^
           |      |     |
           |      |     (3) following ‘true’ branch...
           |
    <------+
    |
  ‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’: event 4
    |
    |cc1:
    | (4): ...to here
    |
  ‘smp_fetch_ssl_fc_has_early’: events 5-7
    |
    |   85 |  if (!ssl)
    |      |     ^
    |      |     |
    |      |     (5) following ‘false’ branch (when ‘ssl’ is non-NULL)...
    |......
    |   88 |  smp->flags = 0;
    |      |  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    |      |             |
    |      |             (6) ...to here
    |......
    |   92 |  smp->data.u.sint = ((conn->flags & CO_FL_EARLY_DATA) &&
    |      |                       ~~~~~~~~~~~
    |      |                           |
    |      |                           (7) dereference of NULL ‘<unknown>’
    |

which is slightly clearer; arguably we shouldn't have pruned events 2-4 from
this at the lower verbosity level, since it's really hard to figure out what
the analyzer is "thinking" in comment #2.

Reply via email to