Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

n-api: fix warning about size_t compare with int #15508

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

sampsongao
Copy link

@sampsongao sampsongao commented Sep 20, 2017

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. dont-land-on-v4.x node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API. labels Sep 20, 2017
Copy link
Member

@mhdawson mhdawson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

src/node_api.cc Outdated
@@ -920,13 +920,13 @@ NAPI_NO_RETURN void napi_fatal_error(const char* location,
size_t message_len) {
char* location_string = const_cast<char*>(location);
char* message_string = const_cast<char*>(message);
if (location_len != -1) {
if (static_cast<int>(location_len) != -1) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

size_t might allow for larger values than signed ints and we're wrongly casting 2^n-1 to -1 (where n is how big size_t is). If we want to allow -1 here, why don't we change the parameter type? Or could we use 0 instead of -1 to signal that we don't want to set the message_string?

src/node_api.cc Outdated
@@ -920,13 +920,13 @@ NAPI_NO_RETURN void napi_fatal_error(const char* location,
size_t message_len) {
char* location_string = const_cast<char*>(location);
char* message_string = const_cast<char*>(message);
if (location_len != -1) {
if (static_cast<int>(location_len) != -1) {
location_string = reinterpret_cast<char*>(
malloc(location_len * sizeof(char) + 1));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Aside: sizeof(char) is 1 by definition and reinterpret_cast is overkill here, static_cast would have sufficed.

What's more, I don't understand why this code makes copies. This function does not return. It seems like completely unneeded complexity.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The reason for doing copy here is to account for strings that are not null terminated.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, but the other two points still stand. As well, you don't handle nullptr return values. If you use node::Malloc(), that's taken care of.

Or use std::string, that will also stop Coverity from complaining about memory leaks.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

@sampsongao can you look at the types that are used by the similar calls in V8 that already had the -1 as the option to indicate null terminated ? We were already passing through -1 to those calls and maybe we need to use the same type here.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

mhdawson commented Sep 21, 2017

Talking with Sampson, in many cases we just pass the -1 on to an v8 call so I don't think we'd want to switch to using 0 instead as then we'd need code to covert.

It may make sense to just change the type to int. I think we discussed size_t versus int before but we may not have factored in that -1 is not valid for size_t

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

-1 is not valid for size_t

It's valid (it wraps around to SIZE_MAX), it probably just isn't what's intended.

Talking with Sampson, in many cases we just pass the -1 on to an v8 call so I don't think we'd want to switch to using 0 instead as then we'd need code to covert.

What about other engines? Abstracting away such details is the point of n-api, isn't it?

@jasongin
Copy link
Member

For some APIs that take a string length, for example napi_create_string_utf8(), 0 is a valid length. So I don't think 0 should be used to indicate automatic length.

Should we consider ssize_t (the signed variant of size_t)? While it's not part of the C++ standard, node already uses it in many places.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

What's wrong with passing the size explicitly? The only reason I can think of is programmer ergonomics but passing -1 or strlen(s) isn't that much of a difference.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

We'd discussed the options in the past and agreed to support the -1 shortcut in the way that V8 does. The latest PR was just to make it consistent across the board. I think we should fix up the type problem and then discuss if we should remove the shortcut completely in a later PR.

@jasongin
Copy link
Member

What's wrong with passing the size explicitly?

That would be fine with me also. In most cases the C++ wrapper would make that automatic anyway. But if we do that we should probably still detect when -1 is passed in, because the compiler usually won't complain and string APIs in many libraries do support it, so people may assume it works with N-API.

Or we could document that SIZE_MAX indicates automatic length, and then -1 would ("accidentally") work the same way. Actually I sort of like this, it seems like a good compromise.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

SIZE_MAX would be fine with me as long as that works in the cases were we pass it on to V8 and its sounds like that will be the case.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

We discussed in N-API meeting today. Here is what we'd like to do

  1. Introduce a new constant NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH
  2. Define NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH as SIZE_MAX
  3. Fix up the checks we have that we were getting warning on to check against NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH
  4. Fix up doc to indicate that people should used NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH instead of -1.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Lets update this PR to do 1-3 and I will submit a separate PR to update the doc.

Copy link
Member

@mhdawson mhdawson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

CI run: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/10192/

@bnoordhuis, @fhinkel can you take a another look, we'd like this to make it into 8.6 which is going out next tuesday.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
@@ -120,13 +120,14 @@ struct napi_env__ {
#define CHECK_NEW_FROM_UTF8_LEN(env, result, str, len) \
do { \
auto str_maybe = v8::String::NewFromUtf8( \
(env)->isolate, (str), v8::NewStringType::kInternalized, (len)); \
(env)->isolate, (str), v8::NewStringType::kInternalized, \
static_cast<int>(len)); \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be nice to have a static_assert(static_cast<int>(NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH) == -1) somewhere

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@addaleax that is a good idea.

Do you think it would make sense to add it just after

namespace {
namespace v8impl {

in node_api.cc

along with a comment indicating the v8 implementation of n-api depends on it being true ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mhdawson I like to put that near where it’s actually used (i.e. around here) but feel free to put it wherever you like :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was thinking you had somewhere else in mind, I'm good with it going into the macro itself

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

centos failures are #15505

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Windows fanned failure was unrelated created - #15558

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Arm failure was an infra issue, not test related.

So overall CI looks good.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
std::string location_string;
std::string message_string;

if (static_cast<int>(location_len) != NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH) {
Copy link
Member

@fhinkel fhinkel Sep 22, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think that size_t always fits into an int. Why do we need to cast here? (Feel free to land once this is addressed if I don't get around to change my review to approve in time.)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree it should not be needed in this check. In places where it is passed on to v8 then it is needed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mhdawson No, the issue isn’t that it’s in the wrong place – it’s that a downcast is a real bug here, because it truncates location_len

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@addaleax, to clarify we know that size_t does not fit into an int, so where its going to be passed to v8 a cast is required to avoid warnings. In this case we should just be comparing NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH directly against location_len.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mhdawson Yeah, but we can’t just downcast without any checks in this case. Imagine a platform that has 32-bit int, and 64-bit size_t. When an addon tries to create a N-API string that contains (2^32 + 1) characters – not knowing that that doesn’t work, because, how would it tell? – N-API would currently silently truncate that size argument to 1, and happily create a one-character string. I think that qualifies as a bug.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I'm still missing something here, sorry. If we change to be:

if (location_len != NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH)

is it that there is a problem later on ?

Make checks directly against NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH
Add assert
Remove one check in unrelated napi function that was
causing a warning and is not needed
@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Pushed change to address comments (I think)

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

New ci run to make sure assert validates we have the right behavior on all platforms: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/10206/

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Latest CI run was good, only failure is known pre-existing problem on centos

auto str_maybe = v8::String::NewFromUtf8( \
(env)->isolate, (str), v8::NewStringType::kInternalized, (len)); \
(env)->isolate, (str), v8::NewStringType::kInternalized, \
static_cast<int>(len)); \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mhdawson The issue remains that this static_cast is invalid if len > INT_MAX && len != NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH, there needs to code that checks for that condition and errors out if it is met … if necessary, I guess that can be done in a subsequent PR, but it’s a bug that ought to be fixed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@addaleax thanks for the clarification, will look at that. Since we want to have the breaking changes in before 8.6 and we are almost out of time I may do it in a follow up PR, but I'll see on Monday.

Copy link
Member

@mhdawson mhdawson Sep 22, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this check may do the trick

RETURN_STATUS_IF_FALSE((env), len <= INT_MAX, (napi_invalid_arg));

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do think you need to check for NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH because that value is usually larger than INT_MAX :) But yes, something like that sounds good

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@addaleax agreed I also need to check for NAPI_AUTO_LENGTH. I'm going to land this PR to make sure we don't fix the Tuesday cutoff, and I'll submit a separate one to fix the bug caused by the cast on Monday.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To be clear, the current check does not have well-defined behavior. Compiler A might do the right thing, compiler B might do something completely different. IOW, this is not release-ready code.

mhdawson pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2017
PR-URL: #15508
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Landed as a406a32

Will leave open until I open follow on PR on monday.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

PR to add check on length #15611

@mhdawson mhdawson closed this Sep 25, 2017
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 25, 2017
PR-URL: #15508
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/ayo that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2017
PR-URL: nodejs/node#15508
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
gabrielschulhof pushed a commit to gabrielschulhof/node that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2018
PR-URL: nodejs#15508
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2018
Backport-PR-URL: #19447
PR-URL: #15508
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants