Skip to content

incorrect output and segfaults from sprintf with %*d (PR#13667)

2 messages · Martin Maechler, Wacek Kusnierczyk

#
vQ> Full_Name: Wacek Kusnierczyk
    vQ> Version: 2.10.0 r48365
    vQ> OS: Ubuntu 8.04 Linux 32bit
    vQ> Submission from: (NULL) (129.241.110.141)


    vQ> sprintf has a documented limit on strings included in the output using the
    vQ> format '%s'.  It appears that there is a limit on the length of strings included
    vQ> with, e.g., the format '%d' beyond which surprising things happen (output
    vQ> modified for conciseness):

    vQ> gregexpr('1', sprintf('%9000d', 1))
    vQ> # [1] 9000 9801

    vQ> gregexpr('1', sprintf('%9000d', 1))
    vQ> # [1]  9000  9801 10602

    vQ> gregexpr('1', sprintf('%9000d', 1))
    vQ> # [1]  9000  9801 10602 11403

    vQ> gregexpr('1', sprintf('%9000d', 1))
    vQ> # [1]  9000  9801 10602 11403 12204

    vQ> ...

    vQ> Note that not only more than one '1' is included in the output, but also that
    vQ> the same functional expression (no side effects used beyond the interface) gives
    vQ> different results on each execution.  Analogous behaviour can be observed with
    vQ> '%nd' where n > 8200.

    vQ> The actual output above is consistent across separate sessions.

    vQ> With sufficiently large field width values, R segfaults:

    vQ> sprintf('%*d', 10^5, 1)
    vQ> # *** caught segfault ***
    vQ> # address 0xbfcfc000, cause 'memory not mapped'
    vQ> # Segmentation fault


Thank you, Wacek.
That's all ``interesting''  ... unfortunately, 

my version of  'man 3 sprintf' contains
(note the "impossible" part above)       
and we haven't used  snprintf() yet, probably because it
requires the  C99 C standard, and AFAIK, we have only relatively
recently started to more or less rely on C99 in the R sources.
       
More precisely, I see that some windows-only code relies on
snprintf() being available  whereas in at least on non-Windows
section, I read   /* we cannot assume snprintf here */

Now such platform dependency issues and corresponding configure
settings I do typically leave to other R-corers with a much
wider overview about platforms and their compilers and C libraries.
       

BTW,  
1) sprintf("%n %g", 1,1)   also seg.faults

2) Did you have a true use case where  the  8192  limit was an
   undesirable limit?

Martin       

    vQ> sessionInfo()
    vQ> # R version 2.10.0 Under development (unstable) (2009-04-20 r48365) 
    vQ> # i686-pc-linux-gnu
#
maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch wrote:
... and this limit is *not* documented.
yes, but this is c documentation, not r documentation.  it's applicable
to a degree, since ?sprintf does say that sprintf is "a wrapper for the
C function 'sprintf'".  however, in c you use a buffer and you usually
have control over it's capacity, while in r this is a hidden
implementational detail, which should not be visible to the user, or
should cause an attempt to overflow the buffer to fail more gracefully
than with a segfault.

in r, sprintf('%9000d', 1) will produce a confused output with a count
of 1's variable (!) across runs (while sprintf('%*d', 9000, 1) seems to
do fine):

    gregexpr('1', sprintf('%*d', 9000, 1))
    # [1] 9000

    gregexpr('1', sprintf('%9000d', 1))
    # [1] 9000 9801 ..., variable across executions

on one execution in a series i actually got this:

Warning message:
In gregexpr("1", sprintf("%9000d", 1)) :
  input string 1 is invalid in this locale

while the very next execution, still in the same session, gave

    # [1]  9000  9801 10602

with sprintf('%*d', 10000, 1) i got segfaults on some executions but
correct output on others, while sprintf('%10000d', 1) is confused again.
yes, but it does also say "must be careful", and it seems that someone
has not been careful enough.
while snprintf would help avoid buffer overflow, it may not be a
solution to the issue of confused output.
it looks like src/main/sprintf.c is just buggy, and it's plausible that
the bug could be repaired in a platform-independent manner.
as do

    sprintf('%n%g', 1, 1)
    sprintf('%n%')

etc., while

    sprintf('%q%g', 1, 1)
    sprintf('%q%')
  
work just fine.  strange, because per ?sprintf 'n' is not recognized as
a format specifier, so the output from the first two above should be as
from the last two above, respectively.  (and likewise in the %S case,
discussed and bug-reported earlier.)
how does it matter?  if you set a limit, be sure to consistently enforce
it and warn the user on attempts to exceed it.  or write clearly in the
docs that such attempts will cause the output to be silently truncated. 
examples such as

    sprintf('%9000d', 1)

do not contribute to the reliability of r, and neither to the user's
confidence in it.

vQ