To get a trial key
fill out the form below
Team License (standard version)
Enterprise License (extended version)
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

>
>
>
Atavisms in large systems

Atavisms in large systems

Aug 06 2009
Author:

Large old program systems developing for tens of years contain a lot of various atavisms and code sections which have been simply written with the use of popular paradigms and styles of different ages. You can watch evolution of programming languages - the oldest code sections are written in C and the most recent contain complex templates in Alexandrescu style.

There are atavisms relating to 64-bit mode as well. To be more exact, they are atavisms which prevent modern 64-bit code from correct operation. I will give you two examples I have learned recently.

The interesting error relates to an old version of Mac OS X system and is situated inside the function malloc_zone_calloc:

// beyond this, assume a programming error
#define MAX_ALLOCATION 0xc0000000 
// Allocate cleared (zero-filled) memory from
// the given zone for num_items objects,
// each of which is size bytes large
void *malloc_zone_calloc(malloc_zone_t *zone,
  size_t num_items, size_t size)
{
  void  *ptr;
  if (malloc_check_start &&
      (malloc_check_counter++ >= malloc_check_start))
  {
    internal_check();
  }
  if (((unsigned)num_items >= MAX_ALLOCATION) ||
      ((unsigned)size >= MAX_ALLOCATION) ||
      ((long long)size * num_items >=
       (long long) MAX_ALLOCATION))
  {
    /* Probably a programming error */
    fprintf(stderr,
      "*** malloc_zone_calloc[%d]: arguments too large: %d,%d\n",
      getpid(), (unsigned)num_items, (unsigned)size);
    return NULL;
  }
  ptr = zone->calloc(zone, num_items, size);
  if (malloc_logger)
    malloc_logger(MALLOC_LOG_TYPE_ALLOCATE |
                  MALLOC_LOG_TYPE_HAS_ZONE |
                  MALLOC_LOG_TYPE_CLEARED,
                  (unsigned)zone,
                  num_items * size, 0,
                  (unsigned)ptr, 0);
  return ptr;
}

Firstly, the function's code contains check of the sizes of memory being allocated strange for the 64-bit system. And secondly, the diagnostic warning you see is incorrect for if we ask to allocate memory for 4 400 000 000 items, due to explicit conversion of the type to unsigned, we will see a strange diagnostic warning about impossibility to allocate memory only for 105 032 704 items.

As far as I understood the note, this strange check was removed from the function only in 2006. Although I may be wrong about the date of correction, this example shows rather well how easy it is to forget about something old.

Popular related articles
PVS-Studio ROI

Date: Jan 30 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

Occasionally, we're asked a question, what monetary value the company will receive from using PVS-Studio. We decided to draw up a response in the form of an article and provide tables, which will sho…
The Ultimate Question of Programming, Refactoring, and Everything

Date: Apr 14 2016

Author: Andrey Karpov

Yes, you've guessed correctly - the answer is "42". In this article you will find 42 recommendations about coding in C++ that can help a programmer avoid a lot of errors, save time and effort. The au…
PVS-Studio for Java

Date: Jan 17 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

In the seventh version of the PVS-Studio static analyzer, we added support of the Java language. It's time for a brief story of how we've started making support of the Java language, how far we've co…
Characteristics of PVS-Studio Analyzer by the Example of EFL Core Libraries, 10-15% of False Positives

Date: Jul 31 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

After I wrote quite a big article about the analysis of the Tizen OS code, I received a large number of questions concerning the percentage of false positives and the density of errors (how many erro…
Free PVS-Studio for those who develops open source projects

Date: Dec 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

On the New 2019 year's eve, a PVS-Studio team decided to make a nice gift for all contributors of open-source projects hosted on GitHub, GitLab or Bitbucket. They are given free usage of PVS-Studio s…
The Evil within the Comparison Functions

Date: May 19 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

Perhaps, readers remember my article titled "Last line effect". It describes a pattern I've once noticed: in most cases programmers make an error in the last line of similar text blocks. Now I want t…
The way static analyzers fight against false positives, and why they do it

Date: Mar 20 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

In my previous article I wrote that I don't like the approach of evaluating the efficiency of static analyzers with the help of synthetic tests. In that article, I give the example of a code fragment…
The Last Line Effect

Date: May 31 2014

Author: Andrey Karpov

I have studied many errors caused by the use of the Copy-Paste method, and can assure you that programmers most often tend to make mistakes in the last fragment of a homogeneous code block. I have ne…
Technologies used in the PVS-Studio code analyzer for finding bugs and potential vulnerabilities

Date: Nov 21 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

A brief description of technologies used in the PVS-Studio tool, which let us effectively detect a large number of error patterns and potential vulnerabilities. The article describes the implementati…
How PVS-Studio Proved to Be More Attentive Than Three and a Half Programmers

Date: Oct 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

Just like other static analyzers, PVS-Studio often produces false positives. What you are about to read is a short story where I'll tell you how PVS-Studio proved, just one more time, to be more atte…

Comments (0)

Next comments

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
This website uses cookies and other technology to provide you a more personalized experience. By continuing the view of our web-pages you accept the terms of using these files. If you don't want your personal data to be processed, please, leave this site.
Learn More →
Accept