the flexArray in structure FSE_DecompressWksp
is just a way to derive a pointer easily,
without risk/complexity of calculating it manually.
Not sure if this change is good enough to avoid ubsan warnings though.
within ZSTDMT_.
This pattern is flagged by less forgiving variants of ubsan
notably used during compilation of the Linux Kernel.
There are 2 other places in the code where this pattern is used.
This fixes just one of them.
* Remove all pointer-overflow suppressions from our UBSAN builds/tests.
* Add `ZSTD_ALLOW_POINTER_OVERFLOW_ATTR` macro to suppress
pointer-overflow at a per-function level. This is a superior approach
because it also applies to users who build zstd with UBSAN.
* Add `ZSTD_wrappedPtr{Diff,Add,Sub}()` that use these suppressions.
The end goal is to only tag these functions with
`ZSTD_ALLOW_POINTER_OVERFLOW`. But we can start by annoting functions
that rely on pointer overflow, and gradually transition to using
these.
* Add `ZSTD_maybeNullPtrAdd()` to simplify pointer addition when the
pointer may be `NULL`.
* Fix all the fuzzer issues that came up. I'm sure there will be a lot
more, but these are the ones that came up within a few minutes of
running the fuzzers, and while running GitHub CI.
To the best of my knowledge:
* `_WIN32` and `_WIN64` are defined by the compiler,
* `WIN32` and `WIN64` are defined by the user, to indicate whatever
the user chooses them to indicate. They mean 32-bit and 64-bit Windows
compilation by convention only.
See:
https://accu.org/journals/overload/24/132/wilson_2223/
Windows compilers in general, and MSVC in particular, have been defining
`_WIN32` and `_WIN64` for a long time, provably at least since Visual Studio
2015, and in practice as early as in the days of 16-bit Windows.
See:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/preprocessor/predefined-macros?view=msvc-140https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winprog64/the-tools
Tests used to be inconsistent, sometimes testing `_WIN32`, sometimes
`_WIN32` and `WIN32`. This brings consistency to Windows detection.
Refine the macro guards to define the functions exactly when they are
needed.
This fixes the chromium build with zstd.
Thanks to @GregTho for reporting!
The Huffman repeat mode checker assumed that the CTable was zeroed in the region `[maxSymbolValue + 1, 256)`.
This assumption didn't hold for tables built in the dictionaries, because it didn't go through the same codepath.
Since this code was originally written, we added a header to the CTable that specifies the `tableLog`.
Add `maxSymbolValue` to that header, and check that the table's `maxSymbolValue` is at least the block's `maxSymbolValue`.
This solution is cleaner because we write this header for every CTable we build, so it can't be missed in any code path.
Credit to OSS-Fuzz
Fix the following warnings reported by the compiler when
ZDICTLIB_STATIC_API is not defined to ZDICTLIB_API:
lib/dictBuilder/cover.c:1122:21: warning: redeclaration of 'ZDICT_optimizeTrainFromBuffer_cover' with different visibility (old visibility
preserved)
lib/dictBuilder/cover.c:736:21: warning: redeclaration of 'ZDICT_trainFromBuffer_cover' with different visibility (old visibility
+preserved)
lib/dictBuilder/fastcover.c:549:1: warning: redeclaration of 'ZDICT_trainFromBuffer_fastCover' with different visibility (old visibility
preserved)
lib/dictBuilder/fastcover.c:618:1: warning: redeclaration of 'ZDICT_optimizeTrainFromBuffer_fastCover' with different visibility (old
visibility preserved)
We already have logic in our Huffman encoder to validate Huffman tables with missing symbols.
We use this for higher compression levels to re-use the previous blocks statistics, or when the dictionaries table has zero-weighted symbols.
This check was leftover as an oversight from before we added validation for Huffman tables.
I validated that the `dictionary_loader` fuzzer has coverage of every line in the `ZSTD_loadCEntropy()` function to validate that it is correctly testing this function.
