C++: Cover variable sized member arrays without a size in Buffer.qll
#8813
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jketema
force-pushed
the
buffer
branch
2 times, most recently
from
12212c1 to
01d9d61
Compare
MathiasVP
reviewed
Apr 22, 2022
geoffw0
previously approved these changes
Apr 22, 2022
Currently the extractor incorrectly emits 0 for the array `data` below:
```
struct myStruct { // c
...
char data[]; // v
};
```
This will change in the future, and no size will be emitted anymore.
This commit makes sure `Buffer.qll` handles arrays without sizes.
|
DCA experiment looks good. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently the extractor incorrectly emits
-10 for the arraydatabelow:This will change with the next version of EDG, and no size will be emitted anymore. This PR makes sure
Buffer.qllhandles arrays without sizes.This is a separate PR to ensure these these changes do not get lost in a much larger PR and to be able to check that this doesn't cause any regressions already before the EDG upgrade.