tree 9ee7cd87fb2dfa0e8fefb4f2b0327a511571feed
parent e21f272a664ab5785606d2caf5c78737458303e5
author David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> 1639586470 -0500
committer Boringssl LUCI CQ <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> 1639609175 +0000

Fix the easy -Wformat-signedness errors.

GCC has a warning that complains about even more type mismatches in
printf. Some of these are a bit messy and will be fixed in separate CLs.
This covers the easy ones.

The .*s stuff is unfortunate, but printf has no size_t-clean string
printer. ALPN protocol lengths are bound by uint8_t, so it doesn't
really matter.

The IPv6 printing one is obnoxious and arguably a false positive. It's
really a C language flaw: all types smaller than int get converted to
int when you do arithmetic. So something like this first doesn't
overflow the shift because it computes over int, but then the result
overall is stored as an int.

  uint8_t a, b;
  (a << 8) | b

On the one hand, this fixes a "missing" cast to uint16_t before the
shift. At the same time, the incorrect final type means passing it to
%x, which expects unsigned int. The compiler has forgotten this value
actually fits in uint16_t and flags a warning. Mitigate this by storing
in a uint16_t first.

The story doesn't quite end here. Arguments passed to variadic functions
go through integer promotion[0], so the argument is still passed to
snprintf as an int! But then va_arg allows for a signedness mismatch[1],
provided the value is representable in both types. The combination means
that %x, though actually paired with unsigned, also accept uint8_t and
uint16_t, because those are guaranteed to promote to an int that meets
[1]. GCC recognizes [1] applies here.

(There's also PRI16x, but that's a bit tedious to use and, in glibc, is
defined as plain "x" anyway.)

[0] https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/conversion#Default_argument_promotions
[1] https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/variadic/va_arg

Bug: 450
Change-Id: Ic1d41356755a18ab922956dd2e07b560470341f4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/50765
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>