https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #8) > The patch I posted for the related pr88993 also relaxes this warning for > printf and fprintf: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg00224.html > > Like in the case of pr88993, the warning is by design and (in my view) makes > sense for sprintf but it's not very useful for the other functions where > very little code worries about exceeding these limits (or even cares about > the functions failing as they can for many other reasons). I tried that patch, but it does not fix this issue. This case now triggers the following warning, which isn't guarded by is_string_func: /* The directive output or either causes or may cause the total length of output to exceed INT_MAX bytes. */ if (likelyximax && fmtres.range.min == fmtres.range.max) warned = fmtwarn (dirloc, argloc, NULL, info.warnopt (), "%<%.*s%> directive output of %wu bytes causes " "result to exceed %<INT_MAX%>", dirlen, target_to_host (hostdir, sizeof hostdir, dir.beg), fmtres.range.min); So with that patch we get: /home/mark/src/elfutils/src/readelf.c: In function ‘print_debug_str_section’: /home/mark/src/elfutils/src/readelf.c:10167:15: error: ‘] "’ directive output of 4 bytes causes result to exceed ‘INT_MAX’ [-Werror=format-overflow=] 10167 | printf (" [%*" PRIx64 "] \"%s\"\n", digits, (uint64_t) offset, str); | ^~~~~~ /home/mark/src/elfutils/src/readelf.c:10167:30: note: format string is defined here 10167 | printf (" [%*" PRIx64 "] \"%s\"\n", digits, (uint64_t) offset, str); | ^~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors Which is actually more mysterious than the previous warning (without the patch as shown in description).
