Re: Possible segfault introduced in commit.c
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Apr 25, 2012, 11:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20120425111435.GA21579@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <CANV9Rr_ev+34Wd030cps0UbgjRYD0=L2DQhbrCOkBVWG-2xaug@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:59:28AM -0700, Michael Mueller wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> As you might already know, we analyze git regularly with Sentry (our
> static analysis tool). Today it picked up a new NULL pointer
> dereference in commit.c:366:
>
> void commit_list_reverse(struct commit_list **list_p)
> {
> struct commit_list *prev = NULL, *curr = *list_p, *next;
>
> if (!list_p)
> return;
> /* function continues... */
> }
>
> list_p is dereferenced on the first line, then tested for NULL on
> the very next statement. If it's possible that list_p is NULL, this
> will be a segfault. If it can't be NULL, then the check is
> unnecessary (and probably misleading).Yes, you're right. There is only one caller currently, and it can never be NULL (it passes the address-of a pointer variable). I think dropping the NULL-check is the right thing; even an empty list will still have a pointer to its NULL head.
-Peff