Message-ID: <18bda8da-1ab0-4a4d-9aca-826610a244a8@altlinux.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:54:35 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check for TupleTableSlot nullness before dereferencing
From: Alexander Kuznetsov <kuznetsovam@altlinux.org>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 egori@altlinux.org, nickel@altlinux.org
Reply-To: kuznetsovam@altlinux.org
References: <98e18ffc-c402-4710-ae28-6d6dbcf08e44@altlinux.org>
 <FDD95AB2-17BF-4C52-A8A9-682115FB4684@yesql.se>
 <ba1926b5-74c6-42c8-8f65-f3de9cbac026@altlinux.org>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <ba1926b5-74c6-42c8-8f65-f3de9cbac026@altlinux.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/18bda8da-1ab0-4a4d-9aca-826610a244a8%40altlinux.org>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

ping. What do you think about reasoning below? Maybe we should consider
proposing different patch for removing redundant check there?

09.10.2024 18:23, Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> 03.10.2024 12:48, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>  From a quick reading we can only reach there after evaluating an expression, so
>> can it really be null though?  This code hasn't changed all that much since
>> 2009, if there was a reachable segfault on a null pointer deref I have a
>> feeling we'd heard about it by now so some extra care seems warranted to ensure
>> it's not a static analyzer false positive.
> Thanks for your response!
> It seems to me that dereferencing is possible under the following scenario:
> [...]
> This entire reasoning is based on the assumption that slot2 can theoretically be NULL, as there is such a check at line 968.
> Is it possible that no errors have occurred because this condition has always been satisfied and is, perhaps, redundant, or maybe I'm misunderstanding something?

-- 
Best regards,
Alexander Kuznetsov