Skip to content

Fix UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR overflow guard silently passing (#52) #112

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
94xhn wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR overflow guard silently passing (#52) #112

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 11 additions & 3 deletions Utilities/sequencer/stm32_seq.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -90,9 +90,17 @@ typedef struct
#define UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR (32)
#endif /* UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR */

#if UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR > 32
#error "UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR must be less than or equal to 32"
#endif /* UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR */
/* NOTE: applications commonly set UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR to an enum
* constant (e.g. #define UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR CFG_SEQ_Task_NBR).
* An enum constant is not visible to the preprocessor, so a
* preprocessor "#if UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR > 32" would silently
* evaluate the unresolved identifier as 0 and never trigger, per the
* C standard's handling of #if. Use a compile-time assertion evaluated
* by the compiler proper (which does see enum values) instead. A
* negative-size array is used rather than _Static_assert/static_assert
* to stay compatible with the C89/C99 toolchains still selectable in
* this project's MDK-ARM/EWARM configurations. */
typedef char UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR_Assert[(UTIL_SEQ_CONF_TASK_NBR <= 32) ? 1 : -1];

/**
* @brief default value of priority number.
Expand Down