From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/4099 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Static analyzers results on musl Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 17:32:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20131004213212.GN20515@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20131004202158.GM20515@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1380922341 13549 80.91.229.3 (4 Oct 2013 21:32:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:32:21 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-4103-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Oct 04 23:32:26 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VSCz3-0000KL-Do for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 23:32:25 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 22327 invoked by uid 550); 4 Oct 2013 21:32:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 22319 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2013 21:32:24 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:4099 Archived-At: On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:10:24AM +0400, Alexander Monakov wrote: > [apologies if you receive this email twice] > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2013, Rich Felker wrote: > > > There are a few warnings that return value of .*nl_langinfo.* is not checked > > > for NULL before use; presumably that is by design. > > > > nl_langinfo is not permitted to return NULL, so this warning makes no > > sense. > > I meant when internal functions like __nl_langinfo_l are called -- this one > can return NULL. Sorry for causing confusion with ".*". But there's no reason to expect that it could return NULL unless this is documented as a possibility. Does the tool you're using assume that any function which returns a pointer might return NULL? Rich