Sorry for the break post... Em qui., 17 de fev. de 2022 às 05:25, Kyotaro Horiguchi < horikyota....@gmail.com> escreveu:
> At Thu, 17 Feb 2022 15:50:09 +0800, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com>
> wrote in
> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 03:51:26PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > So, the function doesn't return 63 for all registered names and wrong
> > > names.
> > >
> > > So other possibilities I can think of are..
> > > - Someone had broken pg_encname_tbl[]
> > > - Cosmic ray hit, or ill memory cell.
> > > - Coverity worked wrong way.
> > >
> > > Could you show the workload for the Coverity warning here?
> >
> > The 63 upthread was hypothetical right? pg_encoding_max_length()
> shouldn't be
>
> I understand that Coverity complaind pg_verify_mbstr_len is fed with
> encoding = 63 by length_in_encoding. I don't know what made Coverity
> think so.
>
I think I found the reason.
>
> > called with user-dependent data (unlike pg_encoding_max_length_sql()),
> so I
> > also don't see any value spending cycles in release builds. The error
> should
> > only happen with bogus code, and assert builds are there to avoid that,
> or
> > corrupted memory and in that case we can't make any promise.
>
> Well, It's more or less what I wanted to say. Thanks.
>
One thing about this thread that may go unnoticed and
that the analysis is done in Windows compilation.
If we're talking about consistency, then the current implementation of
pg_encoding_max_length is
completely inconsistent with the rest of the file's functions, even if it's
to save a few cycles, this is bad practice.
int
pg_encoding_max_length(int encoding)
{
return (PG_VALID_ENCODING(encoding) ?
pg_wchar_table[encoding].maxmblen :
pg_wchar_table[PG_SQL_ASCII].maxmblen);
}
I think that something is wrong with that implementation,
because Coverity has many warnings about this.
Perhaps, this is a mistake, but I'm not convinced yet.
1. One #ifdef with a mistake, the correct is _WIN32 and not WIN32.
(src/common/encnames).
#ifndef WIN32
#define DEF_ENC2NAME(name, codepage) { #name, PG_##name }
#else
#define DEF_ENC2NAME(name, codepage) { #name, PG_##name, codepage }
#endif
Why does this ifdef exist?
If the correct is this?
#define DEF_ENC2NAME(name, codepage) { #name, PG_##name, codepage }
2. This path:
#define DEF_ENC2NAME(name, codepage) { #name, PG_##name }
DEF_ENC2NAME(EUC_JP, 20932),
What happens if pg_encoding_max_length is called
with Database->encoding equals 20932 ?
Can you test the v2 of the patch?
regards,
Ranier Vilela
v2_fix_out_of_bounds_wchar.patch
Description: Binary data
