commit b99bd3e7ff0220420ab792be5e9fe02b10d780ea Author: teor (Tim Wilson-Brown) teor2345@gmail.com Date: Fri Mar 4 18:14:00 2016 +0100
Add unit tests with dates from 2035 to 2039
Platforms with 32-bit time_t sometimes give different results. They don't always indicate failure on overflow, #18480 should fix these. --- src/test/test_util.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 107 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/test/test_util.c b/src/test/test_util.c index 37f7d93..f0b9476 100644 --- a/src/test/test_util.c +++ b/src/test/test_util.c @@ -328,6 +328,25 @@ test_util_time(void *arg) tor_gmtime_r(&t_res, &b_time); TM_EQUAL(a_time, b_time);
+ /* This value is in range with 32 bit and 64 bit time_t */ + a_time.tm_year = 2037-1900; + t_res = 2115180895UL; + tt_int_op(t_res, OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); + tor_gmtime_r(&t_res, &b_time); + TM_EQUAL(a_time, b_time); + + /* This value is out of range with 32 bit time_t, but in range for 64 bit + * time_t */ + a_time.tm_year = 2039-1900; +#if SIZEOF_TIME_T == 4 + tt_int_op((time_t) -1,OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); +#elif SIZEOF_TIME_T == 8 + t_res = 2178252895UL; + tt_int_op(t_res, OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); + tor_gmtime_r(&t_res, &b_time); + TM_EQUAL(a_time, b_time); +#endif + /* Test tor_timegm out of range */
/* year */ @@ -548,6 +567,37 @@ test_util_time(void *arg) i = parse_rfc1123_time(timestr, &t_res); tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)1091580502UL); + + /* This value is in range with 32 bit and 64 bit time_t */ + format_rfc1123_time(timestr, (time_t)2080000000UL); + tt_str_op("Fri, 30 Nov 2035 01:46:40 GMT",OP_EQ, timestr); + + t_res = 0; + i = parse_rfc1123_time(timestr, &t_res); + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); + tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)2080000000UL); + + /* This value is out of range with 32 bit time_t, but in range for 64 bit + * time_t */ + format_rfc1123_time(timestr, (time_t)2150000000UL); +#if SIZEOF_TIME_T == 4 + /* format_rfc1123_time should indicate failure on overflow, but it doesn't + * yet. Hopefully #18480 will improve the failure semantics in this case. + tt_str_op("Wed, 17 Feb 2038 06:13:20 GMT",OP_EQ, timestr); + */ + + t_res = 0; + i = parse_rfc1123_time(timestr, &t_res); + tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, i); +#elif SIZEOF_TIME_T == 8 + tt_str_op("Wed, 17 Feb 2038 06:13:20 GMT",OP_EQ, timestr); + + t_res = 0; + i = parse_rfc1123_time(timestr, &t_res); + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); + tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)2150000000UL); +#endif + /* The timezone doesn't matter */ t_res = 0; tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, @@ -595,6 +645,24 @@ test_util_time(void *arg) i = parse_iso_time("2004-8-4 0:48:22", &t_res); tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)1091580502UL); + + /* This value is in range with 32 bit and 64 bit time_t */ + t_res = 0; + i = parse_iso_time("2035-11-30 01:46:40", &t_res); + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); + tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)2080000000UL); + + /* This value is out of range with 32 bit time_t, but in range for 64 bit + * time_t */ + t_res = 0; + i = parse_iso_time("2038-02-17 06:13:20", &t_res); +#if SIZEOF_TIME_T == 4 + tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, i); +#elif SIZEOF_TIME_T == 8 + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ, i); + tt_int_op(t_res,OP_EQ, (time_t)2150000000UL); +#endif + tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_iso_time("2004-08-zz 99-99x99", &t_res)); tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_iso_time("2011-03-32 00:00:00", &t_res)); tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_iso_time("2011-03-30 24:00:00", &t_res)); @@ -639,6 +707,25 @@ test_util_time(void *arg) tt_str_op("2012-01-11T15:38:58.003060",OP_EQ, timestr); tt_int_op(strlen(timestr),OP_EQ, ISO_TIME_USEC_LEN);
+ tv.tv_usec = 0; + /* This value is in range with 32 bit and 64 bit time_t */ + tv.tv_sec = (time_t)2080000000UL; + format_iso_time(timestr, (time_t)tv.tv_sec); + tt_str_op("2035-11-30 01:46:40",OP_EQ, timestr); + + /* This value is out of range with 32 bit time_t, but in range for 64 bit + * time_t */ + tv.tv_sec = (time_t)2150000000UL; + format_iso_time(timestr, (time_t)tv.tv_sec); +#if SIZEOF_TIME_T == 4 + /* format_iso_time should indicate failure on overflow, but it doesn't yet. + * Hopefully #18480 will improve the failure semantics in this case. + tt_str_op("2038-02-17 06:13:20",OP_EQ, timestr); + */ +#elif SIZEOF_TIME_T == 8 + tt_str_op("2038-02-17 06:13:20",OP_EQ, timestr); +#endif + done: ; } @@ -712,6 +799,26 @@ test_util_parse_http_time(void *arg) tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ,parse_http_time("Mon, 31 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT", &a_time)); tt_int_op((time_t)1356912000UL,OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); T("2012-12-31 00:00:00"); + + /* This value is in range with 32 bit and 64 bit time_t */ + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ,parse_http_time("Fri, 30 Nov 2035 01:46:40 GMT", &a_time)); + tt_int_op((time_t)2080000000UL,OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); + T("2035-11-30 01:46:40"); + + /* This value is out of range with 32 bit time_t, but in range for 64 bit + * time_t */ +#if SIZEOF_TIME_T == 4 + /* parse_http_time should indicate failure on overflow, but it doesn't yet. + * Hopefully #18480 will improve the failure semantics in this case. */ + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ,parse_http_time("Wed, 17 Feb 2038 06:13:20 GMT", &a_time)); + tt_int_op((time_t)-1,OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); +#elif SIZEOF_TIME_T == 8 + tt_int_op(0,OP_EQ,parse_http_time("Wed, 17 Feb 2038 06:13:20 GMT", &a_time)); + tt_int_op((time_t)2150000000UL,OP_EQ, tor_timegm(&a_time)); + T("2038-02-17 06:13:20"); +#endif + + tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_http_time("2004-08-zz 99-99x99 GMT", &a_time)); tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_http_time("2011-03-32 00:00:00 GMT", &a_time)); tt_int_op(-1,OP_EQ, parse_http_time("2011-03-30 24:00:00 GMT", &a_time));