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.
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.

>
>
>
Difference between %p and %x

Difference between %p and %x

April 5, 2013
Author:

Functions belonging to the printf function family have the type specifiers "%p" and "%x".

  • "x" and "X" serve to output a hexadecimal number. "x" stands for lower case letters (abcdef) while "X" for capital letters (ABCDEF).
  • "p" serves to output a pointer. It may differ depending upon the compiler and platform.

One specifier is often used instead of another on 32-bit systems, but it is a mistake. Here is an example:

int a = 10;
int *b = &a;
printf("%p\n",b);
printf("%X\n",b);

On a Win32 system, the following result will be printed:

0018FF20
18FF20

As you may see, the output results for "%p" and "%X" are rather similar. This similarity leads to inaccuracy in the code and this, in turn, results in errors occurring when you port a program to a 64-bit platform. Most often it is "%X" that is used instead of "%p" to output the value of a pointer, and this results in printing of an incorrect value if the object is situated outside the four less significant Gbytes of the address space. Let us consider the corresponding 64-bit version of this program:

size_t Gb = 1024*1024*1024;
char *a = (char *)malloc(2 * Gb * sizeof(char));
char *b = (char *)malloc(2 * Gb * sizeof(char));
printf("use %%X: a=%X\n", a);
printf("use %%X: b=%X\n", b);
printf("use %%p: a=%p\n", a);
printf("use %%p: b=%p\n", b); 
use %X: a=80000040
use %X: b=40010040
use %p: a=0000000080000040
use %p: b=0000000140010040

The pointer value "b" is printed incorrectly when using "%X".

Here is one more example. Although it looks strange, the code given here in an abridged form was used in a real application in the UNDO/REDO subsystem:

// Here the pointers were saved in the form of a string
int *p1, *p2;
....
char str[128];
sprintf(str, "%X %X", p1, p2);
// In another function this string was processed
// in this way:
void foo(char *str)
{
  int *p1, *p2;
  sscanf(str, "%X %X", &p1, &p2);
  // The result is incorrect values of pointers p1 and p2.
  ...
}

Manipulation with the pointers using "%X" resulted in an incorrect program behavior on a 64-bit system. Note that such errors might occur very rarely. To diagnose these, and other similar flaws, it is a good idea to use the analyzer PVS-Studio.

References

Popular related articles
Characteristics of PVS-Studio Analyzer by the Example of EFL Core Libraries, 10-15% of False Positives

Date: 07.31.2017

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…
The Evil within the Comparison Functions

Date: 05.19.2017

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…
Free PVS-Studio for those who develops open source projects

Date: 12.22.2018

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…
Appreciate Static Code Analysis!

Date: 10.16.2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

I am really astonished by the capabilities of static code analysis even though I am one of the developers of PVS-Studio analyzer myself. The tool surprised me the other day as it turned out to be sma…
The Last Line Effect

Date: 05.31.2014

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…
How PVS-Studio Proved to Be More Attentive Than Three and a Half Programmers

Date: 10.22.2018

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…
Technologies used in the PVS-Studio code analyzer for finding bugs and potential vulnerabilities

Date: 11.21.2018

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…
PVS-Studio for Java

Date: 01.17.2019

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…
Static analysis as part of the development process in Unreal Engine

Date: 06.27.2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

Unreal Engine continues to develop as new code is added and previously written code is changed. What is the inevitable consequence of ongoing development in a project? The emergence of new bugs in th…
The way static analyzers fight against false positives, and why they do it

Date: 03.20.2017

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…

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