See Also: part 1 and part 2.

There is always a first time for everything, and my first time doing this was a few years ago with a day job task. I was going to create a Windows DLL (dynamic link library) that would handle hundreds of messages (write/read response) via the I2C protocol.

The message protocol featured a header that contained a Message Type and Command Code. There were several types of messages, but for this blog post let’s just look at two types:

• DATA – a message sent to do something, with our without payload data. These messages get a response back that is either an ACKnowledgement (it worked) or a NAK (it did not work). For example “set the time to X”.
• QUERY – a message sent to request information, such as “what time is it?”

The Command Code was a byte, which meant there could be up to 256 (0-255) commands per message type. For example, some DATA messages might be defined like this:

#define DATA_PING        0 // ACK if there, NAK if not
#define DATA_RESET_CPU   1 // Reset CPU
#define DATA_EXPLODE     2 // Cause the penguin on the TV set to explode.

And QUERY messages might be like:

#define QUERY_STATUS      0 // Returns a status response
#define QUERY_VOLTAGE     1 // Returns the voltage
#define QUERY_TEMPERATURE 2 // Returns the temperature

These are, of course, made up examples, but you get the idea.

We had a number of different board types on our system that could receive these messages. Some messages were only applicable to specific boards (like, you couldn’t get temperature from a board that did not have a thermometer circuit or whatever). My idea was to create simple C functions that represented the message sent to the specific board, like this:

resp = AlphaBoardPING ();
resp = BetaBoardPING ();
resp = DeltaBoardPING ();
...
resp = BetaBoardRESET_CPU ();
...
resp = DeltaBoardQUERY_STATUS (...);

…and so on. I thought it would make a super simple way to write code to send messages and get back the status or response payload or whatever.

This is what prompted me to write a post about returning values as full structures in C. That technique was used there, making it super simple to use (and no chance of a wrong pointer crashing things).

I experimented with these concepts on my own time to make sure this idea would work. Some of the things I did ended up on my GitHub page:

• https://github.com/allenhuffman/GetPutData – routines that let you put bytes or other data types in a buffer. Code similar to this was used to create the message bytes (header, payload, checksum at the end, etc.)
• https://github.com/allenhuffman/StructureToFromBuffer – routines that would let me define how bytes in a buffer should be copied into a C structure. I was proud of this approach since it let me pass a pointer to a buffer of bytes along with some tables and have it return a fully populated C structure ready to use. This greatly simplified the amount of work needed to use these messages.

But, as I like to point out, I am pretty lazy and hate doing so much typing. The thought of creating hundreds of functions by hand was not how I wanted to spend my time. Instead, I wanted to find a way to automate the creation of these functions. After all, they all followed the same pattern:

• Header – containing Message Type, Command Code, number of byte in a payload, etc.
• Payload – any payload bytes
• Checksum – at the end

The only thing custom would be what Message Type and Command Code to put in, and if there was a payload to send, populating those bytes with the appropriate data.

When a response was received, it would be parsed based on the Message Type and Command Code, and return a C structure matching the response payload.

A program to write a program?

Initially, I thought about making a program or script that would spit out hundreds of functions. But, this not lazy enough. Sure, I could have done this and created hundreds of functions, but what if those functions needed a change later? I’d have to update the program that created the functions and regenerate all the functions all over again.

There has to be a better lazier way.

Macros: a better lazier way

I realized I could make a set of #define macros that could insert proper C code or prototypes. Then, if I ever needed to change something, I only had to change the macro. There would be no regeneration needed, since the next compile would use the updated macro. Magic!

It worked very well, and created hundreds and hundreds of functions without me ever having to type more than the ones in the macro.

It worked so well that I ended up using this approach very recently for another similar task I was far too lazy to do the hard way. I thought I would share that much simpler example in case you are lazy as well.

A much simpler example

At work we use LabWindows/CVI, a Windows C compiler with its own GUI. It has a GUI editor where you create your window with buttons and check boxes and whatever, then you use functions to load the panel, display it, and hide it when done. They look like this:

int panelHandle = LoadPanel (0, "PanelMAIN.uir", PANEL_MAIN);

DisplayPanel (panelHandle);

// Do stuff...

HidePanel (panelHandle);

DiscardPanel (panelHandle);

Then, when you interact with the panel, you have callback functions (if the user clicks the “OK” button, it jumps to a function you might name “UserClickedOKButtonCallback()” or whatever.

If you need to manipulate the panel, such as changing the status of a Control (checkbox, text box, or whatever), you can set Values or Attributes of those Controls.

SetCtrlVal (panelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_OK_BUTTON, 1);
SetCtrlAttribute (panelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_CANCEL_BUTTON, ATTR_DIMMED, 1);

It is a really simple system and one that I, as a non-windows programmer who had never worked with GUIs before, was able to pick up and start using quickly.

Simplicity can get complicated quickly…

One of the issues with this setup is that you had to have the panel handle in order to do something. If a message came in from a board indicating there was a fault, that code might need to toggle on some “RED LED” graphics on a GUI panel to indicate the faulted condition. But, that callback function may not have any of the panel IDs. The designed created a lookup function to work around this:

int mainPanelHandle = LookUpPanelHandle(MAIN_PANEL);
SetCtrlVal (mainPanelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_FAULT_LED, 1);

A function similar to that was in the same C file where all the panels were loaded. Their handles saved in variables, then the LookUp function would go through a huge switch/case with special defines for every panel and return the actual panel handle that matched the define passed in.

It worked great but it was slower since it had to scan through that list every time we wanted to look up a panel. At some point, all the panel handles were just changed to global variables so they could be accessed quickly without any lookup:

SetCtrlVal (g_MainPanelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_FAULT_LED, 1);

This also worked great, but did not work from threads that did not have access to the main GUI context. Since I am not a Windows programmer, and have never used threads on any embedded systems, I do not actually understand the problem (but I hear there are “thread safe” variables that can be used for this purpose).

Self-contained panel functions for the win!

Instead of learning those special “thread safe” techniques, I decided to create a set of self-contained panel functions so you could do things like this:

int mainPanelHandle = PanelMainInit (); // Load/init the main panel.
PanelMainDispay (); // Display the panel.
SetCtrlVal (mainPanelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_FAULT_LEFT, 1);
...
PanelMainHide ();
...
PanelMainTerm (); // Unload main panel and release the memory.

When I needed to access a panel from another routine, I would use a special function that returned the handle:

int panelMainHandle = PanelMainGetHandle ();
SetCtrlVal (mainPanelHandle, PANEL_MAIN_FAULT_LEFT, 1);

I even made these functions automatically Load the panel if needed, meaning a user could just start using a panel and it would be loaded on-demand if was not already loaded. Super nice!

Here is a simple version of what that code looks like:

static int S_panelHandle = 0; // Zero is not a valid panel handle.

int PanelMainInit (void)
{
    int panelHandle = 0;

    if (S_panelHandle <= 0) // Zero is not a valid panel handle. 
    {
        panelHandle = LoadPanel (0, "PanelMAIN.uir", PANEL_MAIN);

        // Only set our static global if this was successful.
        if (panelHandle > 0) // Zero is not a valid panel handle. 
        {
            S_panelHandle = panelHandle; 
        }
    }
    else // S_panelHandle was valid.
    {
        panelHandle = S_panelHandle;
    }	
    
    // Return handle or status in case anyone wants to error check.
    return panelHandle;
}

int PanelMainGetHandle (void)
{
    // Return handle or status in case anyone wants to error check.
    return PanelMainInit ();
}

int PanelMainTerm (void)
{
    int status = UIEHandleInvalid;

    if (S_panelHandle > 0) // Zero is not a valid panel handle.
    {
        status = DiscardPanel (S_panelHandle);
        if (status == UIENoError)
        {
            S_panelHandle = 0; // Zero is not a valid panel handle. 
        }
    }

    // Return status in case anyone wants to error check.
    return status;
}

int PanelMainDisplay (void)
{
    int status = UIEHandleInvalid;
    int panelHandle;
	
    panelHandle = PanelMainInit (); // Init if needed.
	
    if (panelHandle > 0) // Zero is not a valid panel handle.
    {
        status = DisplayPanel (panelHandle);
    }
	
    // Return status in case anyone wants to error check.
    return status;
}

int PanelMainHide (void)
{
    int status = UIEHandleInvalid;

    if (S_panelHandle > 0) // Zero is not a valid panel handle.
    {
        status = HidePanel (S_panelHandle);
    }
	
    // Return status in case anyone wants to error check.
    return status;
}

This greatly simplified dealing with the panels. Now they could “just be used” without worrying about loading, etc. There was no long Look Up table, and no global variables. The only places the panel handles were kept was inside the file where the panel’s functions were.

Nice and simple, and it worked even greater than the first two attempts.

…until you have to make a hundred of these functions…

…and then decide you need to change something and have to make that change in a hundred functions.

My solution was to use #define macros to generate the code and prototypes, then I would only have to change the macro to alter how all the panels works. (Spoiler: This worked even greater than the previous greater.)

In part 2, I will share a simple example of how this works. If you are lazy enough, you might actually find it interesting.

Until then…

A long, long time ago, I learned about malloc() in C. I could make a buffer like this:

char *buffer = malloc (1024);

…use it, then release it when I was done like this:

free (buffer);

I have discussed malloc here in the past, including a recent post about an error checking malloc I created to find a memory leak.

But today, the Bing CoPilot A.I. suggested I use calloc instead.

And I wasn’t even sure I even remembered this was a thing. And it has been there since before C was standardized…

void* calloc (size_t num, size_t size);

malloc() will return a block of memory and, depending on the operating system and implementation in the compiler, that memory may have old data in it. Hackers were known to write programs that would allocate blocks of memory then inspect it to see what they could find left over from another program previously using it.

Hey, everybody’s gotta have a hobby…

calloc() is a “clear allocation” where it will initialize the memory it returns to zero before returning it to you. It also takes two parameters instead of just one. While malloc() wants to know the number of bytes you wish to reserve, calloc() wants to how know many things (bytes, structures, etc.) you want to reserve, and the size of each thing.

To allocate 1024 bytes using calloc() you would use:

char *buffer = calloc (1, 1024);

…and get one thing of 1024 bytes. Or maybe you prefer reversing that:

char *buffer = calloc (1024, 1);

…so you get 1024 things that are 1 byte each.

Either way, what you get back is memory all set to zeros.

calloc() was suggested by the A.I. because I was allocating a set of structures like this:

// Typedefs
typedef struct
{
    int x;
    int y;
    int color;
} MyStruct;

MyStruct *array = malloc (sizeof(MyStruct) * 42);

The A.I. saw that, and suggested calloc() instead, like this:

MyStruct *array = calloc (42, sizeof(MyStruct));

I do think that looks a bit cleaner and more obvious, if you are familiar with calloc(), and as long as you don’t need the extra speed (setting that memory to 0 should take more time than not doing that), it seems like something to consider.

And maybe that will break me (and other programmers who wrote code before me that I may one day maintain) from doing it manually like…

char *ptr = malloc (1024);
memset (ptr, 0x0, 1024);

I wonder if I will even remember this the next time I need to malloc() something.

I mean calloc() something.

Whatever.

Until then…

When you are old (or “experienced” if you prefer), you begin to realize how much of what you learned is wrong. Even if it was “right” when you learned it. I think of all peers that went through computer courses at colleges back in the late 1980s or 1990s, learning now-obsolete languages and being taught methods and approaches that are today considered wrong.

When I learned C, it was on a pre-ANSI K&R C compiler. I learned it on my Radio Shack Color Computer 3 under the OS-9 operating system, with assistance from a friend of mine who had learned C on his Commodore Amiga.

I had alot of new things to learn in 1995 when I took a job with Microware Systems Corporation (creator of OS-9 and the K&R compiler I had learned on). Their Ultra-C compiler was an ANSI compiler, and it did things quite different.

In that era of the C89/C90 standard, arrays were just arrays and we liked it that way:

int array[42];

if you wanted things to be more flexible, you had to malloc() memory yourself.

int *array = malloc (sizeof(int)*42);

…and remember to stay within your boundaries and clean up/free that memory when you were done with it.

But C99 changed this, somewhat, with the introduction of VLAs (Variable Length Arrays). Now you could declare an array using a variable like this:

int x=42;

int array(x);

Neat. I do not think I have ever used this. One downside is you cannot do this with static variables, since those are created/reserved at compile time. But it is still neat.

But today I learned, you couldn’t rely on VLA is you were using C11. Apparently, they became optional that year. A compiler would define a special define if it did not support them:

__STD_NO_VLA__

But at least for twelve years of the standard, you could rely on them, before not being able to rely on them.

And then C23 happened, which I just learned made VLAs mandatory again.

So, uh, I guess if you have the latest and greatest, you can use them. For now. Until some future change makes them option again. Or removes them. Or whatever.

Still neat.

But I doubt any of the embedded C compilers I use for my day job support them.

Here is a quick one… At my day job, I found lines of code like this:

memcpy(systemDataPtr->serialNumber, resp.serialNumber, 16);

A quick peek at systemDataPtr->serialNumber shows it defined as this:

unsigned char serialNumber[MAX_SERIAL_NUMBER_LENGTH];

…with that constant defined as:

#define MAX_SERIAL_NUMBER_LENGTH        16

So while 16 is correct, the use of hard-coded “magic numbers” (hat tip to a previous manager, Pete S., who introduced me to that term) is probably best to be avoided. Change that #define, and things could go horribly wrong with a memory overrun or massive nuclear explosion or something.

One simple fix is to use the #define in the memcpy:

memcpy(systemDataPtr->serialNumber, resp.serialNumber, MAX_SERIAL_NUMBER_LENGTH);

This, of course, assumes that resp.serialNumber is also 16. Let’s see:

char serialNumber[16];

Ah, magic number! In this case, it comes from a DLL header file that does not share that #define, and the header file for the DLL was made by someone who had never made a Windows DLL before (me) and did not make #defines for these various lengths.

What if the DLL value ever got out-of-sync? Worst case, not all data would be copied (only 16 bytes). That seems fine. But if the DLL value became smaller, like 10, then the memcpy would still copy 16 bytes, copying the 10 from the DLL buffer plus 6 bytes of data in memory after it — buffer overrun?

In this case, since the destination buffer can hold 16 bytes, and we only copy up 16 bytes, the worst case is we could get some unintended data in that buffer.

sizeof() exists for a reason.

One thing I tend to do is use sizeof() instead of hard-coded numbers or the #define, since it will continue to work if the source buffer ever got changed from using the #define:

memcpy(systemDataPtr->serialNumber, resp.serialNumber, sizeof(systemDataPtr->serialNumber));

But this still has the same issue if the source resp.serialNumber became larger.

A safer, and more ridiculous, memcpy

Naturally, I came up with a ridiculous “solution”: A safer memcpy() that is much more of a pain to use because you have to know the size of each buffer and tell it the size of each buffer so it can make sure not to copy something larger than will fit into the destination buffer.

Here is the prototype of memcpy():

void * memcpy ( void * destination, const void * source, size_t num );

It will blindly copy up to “num” bytes from “source” to “destination”. But a ridiculous safer memcpy might look like this:

void * memcpy_safer ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                      const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                      size_t num );

Just think of the extra overhead to add two more parameters for every use! Plus, it is a longer function name so you get to type even more! Wonderful.

Here is a quick implementation:

void * memcpy_safer ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                      const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                      size_t num )
{
    // Use whichever size is the smallest.
    if ((num > sizeOfDestination) || (num > sizeOfSource))
    {
        if (sizeOfDestination < sizeOfSource)
        {
            num = sizeOfDestination;
        }
        else
        {
            num = sizeOfSource;
        }
    }
    
    return memcpy ( destination, source, num);
}

Now that the function knows the size of source and destination, it can do a simple check to make sure to use whichever is smallest for the max number of bytes to copy — regardless (or irregardless, depending on which you prefer) of how many bytes you specified.

If both buffers are larger than the “num” passed in, num is used. But if “num” is larger than either buffer, it is reduced to match the largest of the two buffers.

Note that this does not do any NULL checks, so it is relying on the behavior of memcpy() which would likely be a crash if NULL is passed in. To improve, NULL checks could be added.

I decided to pass this function into Bing CoPilot and see what it “thought” about this:

Limitations & Risks

Silent truncation: If num is too large, the function silently reduces it. This can lead to subtle bugs if the caller expects all bytes to be copied.

No error signaling: There’s no return code or logging to indicate that truncation occurred.

Still not “safe” in all cases: If destination or source are NULL, or if the buffers overlap, memcpy may still cause undefined behavior.

No runtime buffer validation: It assumes the caller provides correct buffer sizes, which may not be guaranteed.

– Bing CoPilot

And, of course, the A.I. offered up these changes:

#include <string.h>
#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdio.h>

void * memcpy_safer ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                      const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                      size_t num )
{
    if (!destination || !source) {
        fprintf(stderr, "Error: NULL pointer passed to memcpy_safer.\n");
        return NULL;
    }

    if (num > sizeOfDestination || num > sizeOfSource) {
        size_t adjusted = (sizeOfDestination < sizeOfSource) ? sizeOfDestination : sizeOfSource;
        fprintf(stderr, "Warning: Truncating copy from %zu to %zu bytes.\n", num, adjusted);
        num = adjusted;
    }

    return memcpy(destination, source, num);
}

That version adds NULL checks, returns a NULL if either buffer passed in was NULL, and adds prints to standard error if a NULL happens or if the value was truncated.

Not bad, predictive language model.

My ridiculous test program

Here is my test program, which I wrote using the Online GDB C compiler:

/******************************************************************************

Welcome to GDB Online.
  GDB online is an online compiler and debugger tool for C, C++, Python, PHP, Ruby, 
  C#, OCaml, VB, Perl, Swift, Prolog, Javascript, Pascal, COBOL, HTML, CSS, JS
  Code, Compile, Run and Debug online from anywhere in world.

*******************************************************************************/
#include <stdint.h> // for uint8_t
#include <stdio.h>  // for printf()
#include <stdlib.h> // for EXIT_SUCCESS
#include <string.h> // for memcpy()

/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// PROTOTYPES
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/

void * memcpy_safer ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                      const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                      size_t num );

void * memcpy_safer2 ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                       const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                       size_t num );

void initializeBuffer (void *dataPtr, size_t dataSize, uint8_t value);

void dumpBuffer (const char* prefix, void *dataPtr, size_t dataSize);

/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// MAIN
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/

int main()
{
    uint8_t smallerBuffer[10];
    uint8_t largerBuffer[15];
    
    // Test 1: copy longer buffer into smaller buffer.
    
    printf ("\nInitialized buffers:\n\n");    
    
    // Initialize buffers with something we can identify later.
    initializeBuffer (smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer), 0x1);
    dumpBuffer ("smallerBuffer", smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer));

    initializeBuffer (largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer), 0x2);
    dumpBuffer ("largerBuffer ", largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer));

    printf ("\nTest 1: Copying largerBuffer into smallerBuffer...\n\n");

    memcpy_safer (smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer), largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer), 42);

    dumpBuffer ("smallerBuffer", smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer));

    // Test 2: copy smaller buffer into larger buffer.

    printf ("\nInitialized buffers:\n\n");

    // Initialize buffers with something we can identify later.
    initializeBuffer (smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer), 0x1);
    dumpBuffer ("smallerBuffer", smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer));

    initializeBuffer (largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer), 0x2);
    dumpBuffer ("largerBuffer ", largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer));

    printf ("\nTest 2: Copying smallerBuffer into largerBuffer...\n\n");

    memcpy_safer (largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer), smallerBuffer, sizeof(smallerBuffer), 42);

    dumpBuffer ("largerBuffer ", largerBuffer, sizeof(largerBuffer));

    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// FUNCTIONS
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/

/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// My ridiculous "safer" memcpy.
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
void * memcpy_safer ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                      const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                      size_t num )
{
    // Use whichever size is the smallest.
    if ((num > sizeOfDestination) || (num > sizeOfSource))
    {
        if (sizeOfDestination < sizeOfSource)
        {
            num = sizeOfDestination;
        }
        else
        {
            num = sizeOfSource;
        }
    }
    
    return memcpy ( destination, source, num);
}


/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// Bing CoPilot changes.
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
void * memcpy_safer2 ( void * destination, size_t sizeOfDestination,
                       const void * source, size_t sizeOfSource,
                       size_t num )
{
    if (!destination || !source) {
        fprintf(stderr, "Error: NULL pointer passed to memcpy_safer.\n");
        return NULL;
    }

    if (num > sizeOfDestination || num > sizeOfSource) {
        size_t adjusted = (sizeOfDestination < sizeOfSource) ? sizeOfDestination : sizeOfSource;
        fprintf(stderr, "Warning: Truncating copy from %zu to %zu bytes.\n", num, adjusted);
        num = adjusted;
    }

    return memcpy(destination, source, num);
}


/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// Utility function to initialize a buffer to a set value.
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
void initializeBuffer (void *dataPtr, size_t dataSize, uint8_t value)
{
    if (NULL != dataPtr)
    {
        memset (dataPtr, value, dataSize);
    }
}


/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
// Utility function to dump bytes in a buffer, with an optional prefix.
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
void dumpBuffer (const char* prefix, void *dataPtr, size_t dataSize)
{
    if (NULL != dataPtr)
    {
        if (NULL != prefix)
        {
            printf ("%s: ", prefix);
        }

        for (size_t idx=0; idx<dataSize; idx++)
        {
            printf ("%02x ", ((uint8_t*)dataPtr)[idx]);
        }
        printf ("\n");
    }
}

// End of memcpy_safer.c

If you want to run it there, you can use this link:

https://onlinegdb.com/Eu7FToIcQ

But of course, I am not using this code. It is ridiculous and requires extra typing.

Besides, I know exactly what I am doing in C and never make any mistakes… Really.

Until next time…