RFR: JDK-8051990 - Uninitialised memory in jdk/src/share/native/java/lang/fdlibm/src/k_standard.c
Hi please review the small change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051990/webrev/ to address the parfait issue in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051990 regards Mark
On 18/02/2015 13:29, Mark Sheppard wrote:
Hi please review the small change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051990/webrev/
to address the parfait issue in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051990
Is this a false positive or is there really something calling __kernel_standard with an invalid type? If there is then setting errno would be good. The other thing that I wonder about is modifying fdlibm in OpenJDK, should fixes be sent upstream? I remember at one point there was a proposal to replace fdlibm with pure java code but I don't think this has bubbled up to the top of anyone's list yet. -Alan.
Hi Alan, as I understand it, it is a case that the switch statement doesn't have an explicit default case, and as such it is seen that there is the potential for exc to return garbage as it is a local (stack) variable. code exc.return is not explicitly initialized in that scenario I have followed the comments 8011989 and set this to wnf but the fix below seemed the correct thing to do ... it is a coding style idiom as to whether switch statements should have an explicit default case. regards Mark On 18/02/2015 13:47, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 18/02/2015 13:29, Mark Sheppard wrote:
Hi please review the small change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051990/webrev/
to address the parfait issue in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051990
Is this a false positive or is there really something calling __kernel_standard with an invalid type? If there is then setting errno would be good.
The other thing that I wonder about is modifying fdlibm in OpenJDK, should fixes be sent upstream? I remember at one point there was a proposal to replace fdlibm with pure java code but I don't think this has bubbled up to the top of anyone's list yet.
-Alan.
Hello, There is an upstream of sorts for fdlibm, but the code changes extremely rarely and I'm doubtful is these sorts of changes would be accepted. I (still) plan to port fdlibm from C to Java these release (this time for sure!), but haven't done so yet. Cheers, -Joe On 2/18/2015 6:05 AM, Mark Sheppard wrote:
Hi Alan,
as I understand it, it is a case that the switch statement doesn't have an explicit default case, and as such it is seen that there is the potential for exc to return garbage as it is a local (stack) variable. code exc.return is not explicitly initialized in that scenario
I have followed the comments 8011989 and set this to wnf
but the fix below seemed the correct thing to do ... it is a coding style idiom as to whether switch statements should have an explicit default case.
regards Mark
On 18/02/2015 13:47, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 18/02/2015 13:29, Mark Sheppard wrote:
Hi please review the small change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051990/webrev/
to address the parfait issue in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051990
Is this a false positive or is there really something calling __kernel_standard with an invalid type? If there is then setting errno would be good.
The other thing that I wonder about is modifying fdlibm in OpenJDK, should fixes be sent upstream? I remember at one point there was a proposal to replace fdlibm with pure java code but I don't think this has bubbled up to the top of anyone's list yet.
-Alan.
participants (3)
-
Alan Bateman
-
joe darcy
-
Mark Sheppard