lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Bugs: bug #36492, Static Analysis on code 1.4.0
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #36492: Static Analysis on code 1.4.0
Submitter: | bayard <bayard> | ||
Submitted: | Fri 18 May 2012 12:02:22 PM UTC | ||
Category: | Contrib | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | None | Status: | Fixed |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | goldsimon |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
lwIP version: | 1.4.0 |
Jump to the original submission
Sun 06 Apr 2014 07:44:22 PM UTC, comment #12: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 19 Jun 2012 07:08:31 PM UTC, comment #11: This will probably get addressed for the next major release. I'd rather not delay the 1.4.1 release while we wait to analyse the errors. |
Kieran Mansley <kieranm> |
Sun 10 Jun 2012 08:54:13 AM UTC, comment #10: Any news ? |
bayard <bayard> |
Wed 30 May 2012 04:16:04 PM UTC, comment #9: I modified debug.h on my side with an infinite loop in LWIP_ASSERT(). The number of error decreased: only 13 !
|
bayard <bayard> |
Tue 29 May 2012 08:16:11 PM UTC, comment #8:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 29 May 2012 08:13:12 PM UTC, comment #7:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 25 May 2012 12:16:14 PM UTC, comment #6: Neither 'port' nor 'naddr.addr' are directly initialized in the function lwip_accept().
|
bayard <bayard> |
Thu 24 May 2012 12:09:37 PM UTC, comment #5:
I don't understand these two warnings.
|
Mason <mason> |
Tue 22 May 2012 04:19:42 PM UTC, comment #4: Please find below the results with modification on macro.
|
bayard <bayard> |
Sun 20 May 2012 08:57:40 AM UTC, comment #3: I can only confirm what Mason wrote: there are far too many false positives in the file you provided. Could you please provide an updated one that correctly taks LWIP_ASSERT as a null-pointer check? |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 18 May 2012 12:54:27 PM UTC, comment #2:
|
Mason <mason> |
Fri 18 May 2012 12:33:10 PM UTC, comment #1: "Pointer 'foo' checked for NULL at line N will be dereferenced at line M" messages are likely all false positives, as line N is an LWIP_ASSERT, which shall not return if the assertion does not hold.
|
Mason <mason> |
Fri 18 May 2012 12:02:22 PM UTC, original submission:
Please find below a static analysis on code Lwip version 1.4.0.
|
bayard <bayard> |
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 5 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014-04-06 | goldsimon | Status | None | Fixed | |
Assigned to | None | goldsimon | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2012-05-30 | bayard | Attached File | - | Added debug.h, #25958 | |
2012-05-18 | bayard | Attached File | - | Added PotentialBugsLWIP.txt, #25880 |
Powered by Savane 3.13-4448.
Corresponding source code
Done, but most of the warnings were either port related or false positives...
Thanks anyway, 1 or 2 were actually meaningful!