All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
	Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:COCCINELLE/Semantic Patches (SmPL)" 
	<cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] coccinelle: tests: unsigned value cannot be lesser than zero
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 12:29:13 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512301227090.2048@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1451473583-15333-1-git-send-email-a.hajda@samsung.com>



On Wed, 30 Dec 2015, Andrzej Hajda wrote:

> Unsigned expressions cannot be lesser than zero. Presence of comparisons
> 'unsigned (<|<=|>|>=) 0' often indicates a bug, usually wrong type of variable.
> The patch beside finding such comparisons tries to eliminate false positives,
> mainly by bypassing range checks.
> 
> gcc can detect such comparisons also using -Wtype-limits switch, but it warns
> also in correct cases, making too much noise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
> ---
> v4: added range check detection, added full check in case value holds a result
>     of signed function
> v3: added bool type
> v2: added --all-includes option
> ---
> Hi Julia,
> 
> This version adds range check detection, as a result false positives are almost
> fully eliminated. Most of kernel patches have been already sent and accepted,
> but some new bugs appeared since then. I will prepare bugfixes soon.
> 
> I have enountered one issue, the patch does not detect range check in
> drivers/leds/leds-tca6507.c:716:
>     if (ret != 0 || reg < 0 || reg >= NUM_LEDS)
> 
> Simplified check, responsible for detectin range checks:
> @@
> expression v, c;
> @@
> 
> * (\( v < 0 \| v <= 0 \)) || (\( v >= c \| v > c \))
> 
> Is it a bug or expected behavior? Maybe consequence of left-to-right associativity?

Yes, it would be an associativity problem.  Could you try with || ... 
added to the right end of your pattern?  That should allow it to let the 
disjunctions appear anywhere at top level, but I'm not sure to what extent 
it works when the pattern already contains a disjunction.  You could also 
try

A || ... || B || ...

julia

> 
> Regards
> Andrzej
> 
>  .../tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci          | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..e977447
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
> +/// Unsigned expressions cannot be lesser than zero. Presence of
> +/// comparisons 'unsigned (<|<=|>|>=) 0' often indicates a bug,
> +/// usually wrong type of variable.
> +///
> +/// To reduce number of false positives following tests have been added:
> +/// - parts of range checks are skipped, eg. "if (u < 0 || u > 15) ...",
> +///   developers prefer to keep such code,
> +/// - comparisons "<= 0" and "> 0" are performed only on results of
> +///   signed functions/macros,
> +/// - hardcoded list of signed functions/macros with always non-negative
> +///   result is used to avoid false positives difficult to detect by other ways
> +///
> +// Confidence: Average
> +// Copyright: (C) 2015 Andrzej Hajda, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. GPLv2.
> +// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
> +// Options: --all-includes
> +
> +virtual context
> +virtual org
> +virtual report
> +
> +@r_cmp@
> +position p;
> +typedef bool, u8, u16, u32, u64;
> +{unsigned char, unsigned short, unsigned int, unsigned long, unsigned long long,
> +	size_t, bool, u8, u16, u32, u64} v;
> +expression e;
> +@@
> +	\( v = e \| &v \)
> +	...
> +	(\( v@p < 0 \| v@p <= 0 \| v@p >= 0 \| v@p > 0 \))
> +
> +@r@
> +position r_cmp.p;
> +typedef s8, s16, s32, s64;
> +{char, short, int, long, long long, ssize_t, s8, s16, s32, s64} vs;
> +expression c, e, v;
> +identifier f !~ "^(ata_id_queue_depth|btrfs_copy_from_user|dma_map_sg|dma_map_sg_attrs|fls|fls64|gameport_time|get_write_extents|nla_len|ntoh24|of_flat_dt_match|of_get_child_count|uart_circ_chars_pending|[A-Z0-9_]+)$";
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +	...
> +(
> +	(\( v@p < 0 \| v@p <= 0 \)) || (\( v >= c \| v > c \))
> +|
> +	(\( v >= c \| v > c \)) || (\( v@p < 0 \| v@p <= 0 \))
> +|
> +	(\( v@p >= 0 \| v@p > 0 \)) && (\( v < c \| v <= c \))
> +|
> +	((\( v < c \| v <= c \) && \( v@p >= 0 \| v@p > 0 \)))
> +|
> +*	(\( v@p <@e 0 \| v@p >=@e 0 \))
> +)
> +	...
> +|
> +	v = f(...)@vs;
> +	... when != v = e;
> +*	(\( v@p <=@e 0 \| v@p >@e 0 \))
> +	...
> +)
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r_cmp.p;
> +e << r.e = "";
> +@@
> +
> +msg = "WARNING: Unsigned expression compared with zero: %s" % (e)
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], msg)
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r_cmp.p;
> +e << r.e = "";
> +@@
> +
> +msg = "WARNING: Unsigned expression compared with zero: %s" % (e)
> +if e:
> +    coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], msg)
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: julia.lawall@lip6.fr (Julia Lawall)
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Subject: [Cocci] [PATCH v4] coccinelle: tests: unsigned value cannot be lesser than zero
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 12:29:13 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512301227090.2048@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1451473583-15333-1-git-send-email-a.hajda@samsung.com>



On Wed, 30 Dec 2015, Andrzej Hajda wrote:

> Unsigned expressions cannot be lesser than zero. Presence of comparisons
> 'unsigned (<|<=|>|>=) 0' often indicates a bug, usually wrong type of variable.
> The patch beside finding such comparisons tries to eliminate false positives,
> mainly by bypassing range checks.
> 
> gcc can detect such comparisons also using -Wtype-limits switch, but it warns
> also in correct cases, making too much noise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
> ---
> v4: added range check detection, added full check in case value holds a result
>     of signed function
> v3: added bool type
> v2: added --all-includes option
> ---
> Hi Julia,
> 
> This version adds range check detection, as a result false positives are almost
> fully eliminated. Most of kernel patches have been already sent and accepted,
> but some new bugs appeared since then. I will prepare bugfixes soon.
> 
> I have enountered one issue, the patch does not detect range check in
> drivers/leds/leds-tca6507.c:716:
>     if (ret != 0 || reg < 0 || reg >= NUM_LEDS)
> 
> Simplified check, responsible for detectin range checks:
> @@
> expression v, c;
> @@
> 
> * (\( v < 0 \| v <= 0 \)) || (\( v >= c \| v > c \))
> 
> Is it a bug or expected behavior? Maybe consequence of left-to-right associativity?

Yes, it would be an associativity problem.  Could you try with || ... 
added to the right end of your pattern?  That should allow it to let the 
disjunctions appear anywhere at top level, but I'm not sure to what extent 
it works when the pattern already contains a disjunction.  You could also 
try

A || ... || B || ...

julia

> 
> Regards
> Andrzej
> 
>  .../tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci          | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..e977447
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
> +/// Unsigned expressions cannot be lesser than zero. Presence of
> +/// comparisons 'unsigned (<|<=|>|>=) 0' often indicates a bug,
> +/// usually wrong type of variable.
> +///
> +/// To reduce number of false positives following tests have been added:
> +/// - parts of range checks are skipped, eg. "if (u < 0 || u > 15) ...",
> +///   developers prefer to keep such code,
> +/// - comparisons "<= 0" and "> 0" are performed only on results of
> +///   signed functions/macros,
> +/// - hardcoded list of signed functions/macros with always non-negative
> +///   result is used to avoid false positives difficult to detect by other ways
> +///
> +// Confidence: Average
> +// Copyright: (C) 2015 Andrzej Hajda, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. GPLv2.
> +// URL: http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
> +// Options: --all-includes
> +
> +virtual context
> +virtual org
> +virtual report
> +
> + at r_cmp@
> +position p;
> +typedef bool, u8, u16, u32, u64;
> +{unsigned char, unsigned short, unsigned int, unsigned long, unsigned long long,
> +	size_t, bool, u8, u16, u32, u64} v;
> +expression e;
> +@@
> +	\( v = e \| &v \)
> +	...
> +	(\( v at p < 0 \| v at p <= 0 \| v@p >= 0 \| v at p > 0 \))
> +
> + at r@
> +position r_cmp.p;
> +typedef s8, s16, s32, s64;
> +{char, short, int, long, long long, ssize_t, s8, s16, s32, s64} vs;
> +expression c, e, v;
> +identifier f !~ "^(ata_id_queue_depth|btrfs_copy_from_user|dma_map_sg|dma_map_sg_attrs|fls|fls64|gameport_time|get_write_extents|nla_len|ntoh24|of_flat_dt_match|of_get_child_count|uart_circ_chars_pending|[A-Z0-9_]+)$";
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +	...
> +(
> +	(\( v at p < 0 \| v@p <= 0 \)) || (\( v >= c \| v > c \))
> +|
> +	(\( v >= c \| v > c \)) || (\( v at p < 0 \| v@p <= 0 \))
> +|
> +	(\( v at p >= 0 \| v at p > 0 \)) && (\( v < c \| v <= c \))
> +|
> +	((\( v < c \| v <= c \) && \( v@p >= 0 \| v at p > 0 \)))
> +|
> +*	(\( v at p <@e 0 \| v@p >=@e 0 \))
> +)
> +	...
> +|
> +	v = f(...)@vs;
> +	... when != v = e;
> +*	(\( v at p <=@e 0 \| v@p >@e 0 \))
> +	...
> +)
> +
> + at script:python depends on org@
> +p << r_cmp.p;
> +e << r.e = "";
> +@@
> +
> +msg = "WARNING: Unsigned expression compared with zero: %s" % (e)
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], msg)
> +
> + at script:python depends on report@
> +p << r_cmp.p;
> +e << r.e = "";
> +@@
> +
> +msg = "WARNING: Unsigned expression compared with zero: %s" % (e)
> +if e:
> +    coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], msg)
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-30 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-30 11:06 [PATCH v4] coccinelle: tests: unsigned value cannot be lesser than zero Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 11:06 ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 11:29 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2015-12-30 11:29   ` Julia Lawall
2015-12-30 12:33   ` Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 12:33     ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 13:25     ` [PATCH v5] " Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 13:25       ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2015-12-30 14:06       ` Julia Lawall
2015-12-30 14:06         ` [Cocci] " Julia Lawall
2016-01-04  7:45         ` [PATCH v6] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-04  7:45           ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-05 12:59           ` Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 12:59             ` [Cocci] " Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 13:02             ` Julia Lawall
2016-01-05 13:02               ` [Cocci] " Julia Lawall
2016-01-05 14:10               ` Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 14:10                 ` [Cocci] " Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 16:48                 ` Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 16:48                   ` [Cocci] " Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 13:49             ` Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-05 13:49               ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-05 14:18               ` Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 14:18                 ` [Cocci] " Geyslan G. Bem
2016-01-05 14:17           ` Julia Lawall
2016-01-05 14:17             ` [Cocci] " Julia Lawall
2016-01-05 14:29             ` Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-05 14:29               ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-07  9:36             ` [PATCH v7] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-07  9:36               ` [Cocci] " Andrzej Hajda
2016-01-07 11:35               ` Julia Lawall
2016-01-07 11:35                 ` [Cocci] " Julia Lawall
2016-01-07 14:37                 ` Michal Marek
2016-01-07 14:37                   ` [Cocci] " Michal Marek

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=alpine.DEB.2.02.1512301227090.2048@localhost6.localdomain6 \
    --to=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
    --cc=a.hajda@samsung.com \
    --cc=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
    --cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=mmarek@suse.com \
    --cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.