Runtime security/memory checks for gcc/gdb

[Shachar Shemesh]

Elazar Leibovich wrote:
>
>
> IIRC the problem was using a different library, and tracing which 
> problems are yours and which are of the library.
> See for instance this 
> rant http://www.mega-nerd.com/erikd/Blog/CodeHacking/house_of_cards.html
> I haven't really got into this, so maybe the suprresion files does 
> allow you to quickly fix it.
The way I see it, a problem in a library you use is still a problem in 
your product. This is not really a false positive.
>
>
> It's more complex than that. The code currently work on the embedded 
> device. This is a mission critical device, so we cannot make changes 
> to the runtime code without testing it throughly first.
> I try therefor to fix the problem in the emulation level without 
> touching the actual code. (for instance, overriding a certain 
> problematic function which used an uninitialized variable, and got 
> away with it in the embedded device, but not in the desktop, or, 
> replace the macro which stores a specific memory address (hex number) 
> which is used by a the code, and is obviously relevant only for the 
> embedded device)
I'll repeat it again, and then stop, as I don't want it to become a war.

The fact it is mission critical is another reason to fix all warnings, 
not a reason to ignore them.

Shachar

-- 
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/pipermail/linux-il/attachments/20100112/33910dce/attachment-0001.html>