Found a false positive analysing this function:
A more synthetic case is:
RAISES_NEG static int
test_cpychecker(PyObject *pyval)
{
int rv = -1;
long val;
if (PyInt_Check(pyval)) {
val = PyInt_AsLong(pyval);
if (val == -1 && PyErr_Occurred()) { goto exit; }
if (val < 1 || val > 4) {
PyErr_SetString(PyExc_ValueError,
"isolation_level must be between 1 and 4");
goto exit;
}
rv = val;
/* Work around cpychecker false positive */
/* if (rv < 0) { */
/* PyErr_SetString(PyExc_ValueError, */
/* "isolation_level must be between 1 and 4"); */
/* goto exit; */
/* } */
}
else {
rv = 1;
}
exit:
return rv;
}where the case that 1 <= val <= 4 is not transferred to rv, so it seems a negative number can be returned with no exception, resulting in the following trace.
Enabling the commented block removes the false positive. I tried to add a test to the plugin test suite but no success.
Found a false positive analysing this function:
A more synthetic case is:
where the case that 1 <= val <= 4 is not transferred to rv, so it seems a negative number can be returned with no exception, resulting in the following trace.
Enabling the commented block removes the false positive. I tried to add a test to the plugin test suite but no success.