I want to sell a PVS-Studio license to the Intel company

I want to sell a PVS-Studio license to the
Intel company
Author: Andrey Karpov
Date: 19.04.2012
I cannot get rid of the urge to sell a PVS-Studio license to the developer team of Intel Performance
Primitives Library.
Of course, I'd like to have some sales in other Intel departments too, but the IPP developers seem closer
to us. First, some of them live in Russia. Second, they are already using static analyzers in their work.
Third, we already have some groundwork in this area. I mean that we already checked the IPP Samples
project twice (first check, second check). It would be, of course, much more interesting to test the IPP
library itself instead of the samples, but we don't have access to its source codes.
So, I'll resort to the standard method of advertising ourselves. We will continue to reanalyze IPP Samples
from time to time to find new errors. It indicates that the PVS-Studio code analyzer is actively
developing. But the greatest profit can be, of course, obtained through regular use of the analyzer, not
single runs. Do not forget the capabilities of night runs and background analysis after compilation.
I will cite some of the errors detected by PVS-Studio v4.60. These are, of course, not all the odd
fragments we've found. There are much more of them, but I cannot tell for sure if they have errors or
not. At the same time, let it be the reason for IPP developers to install and try our tool. We have
changed the trial model so that the tool now possesses its full functionality. So, you are welcome to try
it.
Let's have a look at odd fragments in the IPP Samples code.
Case N1. Meaningless statement
AACStatus bsacdecSetNumChannels(Ipp32s channelConfiguration,
AACDec *state)
{
state->com.m_channel_number = channelConfiguration;
if (channelConfiguration == 7) {
state->com.m_channel_number;
}
return AAC_OK;
}

PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V607 Ownerless expression 'state->com.m_channel_number'. aac_dec
aac_dec_api_fp.c 1404
The "state->com.m_channel_number;" statement is very odd. An assignment or something else must be
missing here.
Case N2. Filling the virtual method table
There are rather many places in IPP Samples where memory is allocated for classes through the malloc()
function and initialized through the memset() function. Maybe there's nothing bad about it, but I'm
discomforted by the fact that these classes have virtual methods. Thus, I suspect that the virtual method
table might be spoiled and something will go wrong.
For example, the _MediaDataEx class contains virtual functions:
virtual bool TryStrongCasting(....) const;
virtual bool TryWeakCasting(....) const;
And this is how an object of this class is created:
Status VC1Splitter::Init(SplitterParams& rInit)
{
MediaDataEx::_MediaDataEx *m_stCodes;
...
m_stCodes = (MediaDataEx::_MediaDataEx *)
ippsMalloc_8u(
START_CODE_NUMBER*2*sizeof(Ipp32s)+
sizeof(MediaDataEx::_MediaDataEx));
...
memset(m_stCodes, 0,
(START_CODE_NUMBER*2*sizeof(Ipp32s)+
sizeof(MediaDataEx::_MediaDataEx)));
...
}
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of
'_MediaDataEx' class. Virtual method table will be damaged by this. vc1_spl umc_vc1_spl.cpp 131

I don't know if there is a problem here, but we'd better warn about it.
The same thing can be seen in the following places:
V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of '_MediaDataEx' class. Virtual method table
will be damaged by this. vc1_dec umc_vc1_video_decoder.cpp 641 False
V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of 'AVS_DISASSEMBLING_CONTEXT' class. Virtual
method table will be damaged by this. avs_enc umc_avs_enc_slice.cpp 45
V598 The 'memcpy' function is used to copy the fields of 'AVSVideoEncoderParams' class. Virtual
method table will be damaged by this. avs_enc umc_avs_enc.cpp 115
V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of 'AVS_DECODING_CONTEXT' class. Virtual
method table will be damaged by this. avs_dec umc_avs_dec_slice_init.cpp 65
V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of 'AVS_DEBLOCKING_CONTEXT' class. Virtual
method table will be damaged by this. avs_common umc_avs_slice.cpp 153
V598 The 'memset' function is used to nullify the fields of 'AVS_RECONSTRUCTING_CONTEXT' class.
Virtual method table will be damaged by this. avs_common umc_avs_slice.cpp 133
Case N3. Checking pointers after use
We've found several fragments where a pointer is used first and then is checked for being a null pointer.
Perhaps the pointer will never be null and the code works correctly all the time, but it's not good
anyway.

For example:
VIDEO_DRV_CREATE_BUFFERS_FUNC(....)
{
...
VideoDrvVideoMemInfo* drv_vm = &(driver->m_VideoMemInfo);
...
if ((NULL == driver) || (NULL == bufs))
{
ERR_SET(VM_NULL_PTR, "null ptr");
}
...
}
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V595 The 'driver' pointer was utilized before it was verified against
nullptr. Check lines: 40, 46. video_renders drv.c 40
The pointer check here should be either moved up or removed at all if the "driver==NULL" condition is
impossible.
Here are other identical code samples:
Ipp16s *pNewSpeech = encoderObj->stEncState.pSpeechPtrNew;
if (NULL==encoderObj || NULL==src || NULL ==dst )
return APIGSMAMR_StsBadArgErr;
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V595 The 'encoderObj' pointer was utilized before it was verified
against nullptr. Check lines: 296, 298. speech encgsmamr.c 296
m_pAVSCompressorParams = DynamicCast<AVSVideoEncoderParams> (pParams);
...
m_qp = m_pAVSCompressorParams->m_iConstQuant;
// check error(s)
if (NULL == m_pAVSCompressorParams)
return UMC_ERR_NULL_PTR;
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V595 The 'm_pAVSCompressorParams' pointer was utilized before it
was verified against nullptr. Check lines: 88, 91. avs_enc umc_avs_enc_fusion_core.cpp 88

Case N4. Odd expressions with commas
There are a couple of fragments with odd commas ','. The first sample:
void GetIntraDCPredictors(VC1Context* pContext)
{
DCPred.DC[13] = pC->DCBlkPred[5].DC,QurrQuant;
...
}
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V521 Such expressions using the ',' operator are dangerous. Make sure
the expression is correct. vc1_dec umc_vc1_dec_mb_com.cpp 370
It might be a misprint, or something is missing here.
The second sample:
V521 Such expressions using the ',' operator are dangerous. Make sure the expression is correct. speech
usc_dtmf.c 309
static int DTMF_16s(....)
{
...
for (i = pIppTDParams->dtmf_fs, j = 0;
i < dtmf_frame_size+pIppTDParams->dtmf_fs, j < nbytes;
i++, j++)
}
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V521 Such expressions using the ',' operator are dangerous. Make sure
the expression is correct. speech usc_dtmf.c 309
This is a more interesting example than the previous one. The logical condition seems to be written
incorrectly. The condition must have looked as follows:
i < dtmf_frame_size+pIppTDParams->dtmf_fs && j < nbytes
Case N5. Odd implicit type conversion
class MeMV
{
public:
MeMV(){};

MeMV(int a0){x = (Ipp16s)a0; y=(Ipp16s)a0;};
MeMV(int a0, int a1){x = (Ipp16s)a0; y=(Ipp16s)a1;};
...
}
MeMV MePredictCalculatorVC1::GetPrediction8x8()
{
...
default:
return false;
...
}
PVS-Studio's diagnostic message: V601 The 'false' value becomes a class object. me
umc_vec_prediction.cpp 754
The GetPrediction8x8() function returns the MeMV type. But in one branch, it returns the 'false' value.
This value is implicitly cast to 'int' and the MeMV(int a0) constructor is called. I'm not sure, but there is
something else to be returned in this code, or an exception should be thrown.
An identical implicit type conversion can be found here:
V601 The 'false' value becomes a class object. me umc_vec_prediction.cpp 717
Case N6. Undefined behavior
In very many places of IPP Samples, you can find constructs that cause undefined or unspecified
behavior. I wrote about some of them in the previous post. Now we have found a whole lot of negative
value shifts. I cannot tell for sure that it may cause some troubles, but I recommend considering this
article: "Wade not in unknown waters. Part three" just in case.
In this file - ipp-samples-ub.txt - you can see where the potentially dangerous code is located.
Conclusion
Dear IPP and IPP Samples developers, we're waiting for your letters. We are ready to discuss and
implement missing functionality in the PVS-Studio tool that prevents you from using it. We are also
ready to implement diagnostic rules relevant to your project.
And all the rest I wish bugless code and invite to our twitter @Code_Analysis where we post links to
interesting articles on C++, programming, static code analysis and the PVS-Studio tool.

I want to sell a PVS-Studio license to the Intel company

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to I want to sell a PVS-Studio license to the Intel company (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

I want to sell a PVS-Studio license to the Intel company