Add code annotations for ignoring specific code paths for coverage
calculations. The primary purpose of this is to make it easy to see the
code paths that we could (and probably should) write test cases for, as
these would have the most impact on delivery of a stable product.
The annotations used are:
`LCOV_EXCL_LINE: <designation>`, `LCOV_EXCL_START: <designation>`,
`LCOV_EXCL_STOP`
Unfortunately `LCOV_EXCL_BR_LINE` does not appear to be supported by
coveralls as it would have been a more elegant solution over START/STOP.
We specifically include the `<designation>` not just for future
reference but because it makes it easy to identify in case we want to
address these conditions in a different way in the future.
The main areas designated for exclusion are:
1. `OutOfMemory` - these are hard to test cases, and on modern systems,
are likely to never occur due to optimistic memory allocations, which
can then later cause the kernel to terminate your application due to
memory not actually being available. c-ares does have *some* testing
framework for this, if we wish to expand in the future, we can easily
use sed to get rid of of these annotations.
2. `DefensiveCoding` - these are impossible to reach paths at the point
in time the code was written. They are there for defensive coding in
case code is refactored in the future to prevent unexpected behavior.
3. `UntestablePath` - these are code paths that aren't possible to test,
such as failure of a system call.
4. `FallbackCode` - This is an entire set of code that is untestable
because its not able to simulate a failure of the primary path.
This PR also does add some actual coverage in the test cases where it is
easy to do.
Fix By: Brad House (@bradh352)
It appears as though we should never sanity check the RR name vs the question name as some DNS servers may return results for alias records.
Fixes Bug: #683
Fix By: Brad House (@bradh352)
All files have their licence and copyright information clearly
identifiable. If not in the file header, they are set separately in
.reuse/dep5.
All used license texts are provided in LICENSES/
The rc4 function iterates over a buffer of size buffer_len who's maximum
value is INT_MAX with a counter of type short that is not guaranteed to
have maximum size INT_MAX.
In circumstances where short is narrower than int and where buffer_len
is larger than the maximum value of a short, it may be possible to loop
infinitely as counter will overflow and never be greater than or equal
to buffer_len.
The solution is to make the comparison be between types of equal width.
This commit defines counter as an int.
Fix By: Fionn Fitzmaurice (@fionn)
Brad House
Daniel Stenberg
Fionn Fitzmaurice