[BUG] bionic: wcscspn()/wcspbrk() treat every wchar_t >= 0x100 as a match (Android 17, CP3A.260905.009)

Description

On Android 17 builds from September 2026, wcscspn() and wcspbrk() stop at the first character of the string that is >= U+0100 whenever the reject set has two or more characters that are all < U+0100. The character is reported as a match even though it is not in the set. wcsspn(), wcschr(), wcsrchr(), wmemchr() and wcsstr() are correct.

Any code that scans wide strings for ASCII delimiters, for example newline or wildcard characters, breaks as soon as the text contains an emoji, CJK, Cyrillic, Greek or Latin Extended character.

Affected / unaffected

Device	Build	Result
Pixel 7	google/panther/panther:17/CP3A.260905.009/16091614:user/release-keys	broken
Pixel 8a	google/akita/akita:17/CP3A.260905.009/16091614:user/release-keys (patch 2026-09-05)	broken
Nothing Phone 2	Nothing/PongEEA/Pong:16/BQ2A.250721.001-BP2A.250605.031.A3 (patch 2026-08-01)	ok

The public android17-release sources (android-17.0.0_r1, June 2026) build wcscspn/wcspbrk from external/llvm-libc, which is a plain nested loop over wchar_t and is correct. The code on the September builds is different (see "Mechanism"), so the regression was introduced between the June and September releases.

Reproducer

Build with the NDK (aarch64-linux-android30-clang), push to /data/local/tmp, run with adb shell:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <wchar.h>

int main(void)
{
    wchar_t s[] = {'a', 0x1F680, 0x100, 'b', 'x', '\n', 0};
    printf("wcscspn(s, L\"x\\n\") = %zu (expected 4)\n", wcscspn(s, L"x\n"));
    printf("wcspbrk(s, L\"x\\n\") = index %ld (expected 4)\n", (long)(wcspbrk(s, L"x\n") - s));
    printf("wcsspn(s, L\"a\\U0001F680\") = %zu (expected 2)\n", wcsspn(s, L"a\U0001F680"));
    return 0;
}

Output on CP3A.260905.009:

wcscspn(s, L"x\n") = 1 (expected 4)
wcspbrk(s, L"x\n") = index 1 (expected 4)
wcsspn(s, L"a\U0001F680") = 2 (expected 2)

A sweep of every code point from U+0001 to U+10FFFF (skipping surrogates and the two set members) with wcscspn(L"<cp>\n", L"x\n") returns 0 instead of 1 for 1,111,808 code points: every one from U+0100 to U+10FFFF. U+0001 to U+00FF are correct.

Which set shapes trigger it (all measured on the Pixel 8a):

Reject set	Result
one character	ok
two or more characters, all < U+0100 (e.g. `L"x\n"`, `L"\xe9\n"`)	broken
two or more characters, at least one >= U+0100	ok
haystack limited to U+0080..U+00FF	ok

Mechanism (from the shipped libc.so)

Disassembly of wcscspn in /apex/com.android.runtime/lib64/bionic/libc.so on CP3A.260905.009 shows three paths selected by the set:

One character: a plain compare loop. Correct.
Two or more characters: a 256-byte bool table on the stack is filled from the set while the set characters are in 1..0xFF. If a set character >= 0x100 is seen, the function falls back to calling wcschr() for each haystack character. Correct.
Otherwise the haystack is scanned against the table:

a2564:  ldrb  w8, [x9, x8]        ; table[c]
a2568:  tbnz  w8, #0, a2578       ; in set -> stop (correct)
a256c:  ldr   w8, [x22, #0x4]!    ; next character
a2570:  cmp   w8, #0x100
a2574:  b.lo  a2564               ; c < 0x100 -> keep scanning
a2578:  ...                       ; c >= 0x100 -> STOP, reported as a match

A character >= 0x100 cannot be in a set whose members are all < 0x100, so for wcscspn the scan must continue past it. The code stops instead. wcsspn has the same structure, and there stopping is the correct answer (the character is not in the keep set), which is why only the complement functions are wrong. wcspbrk is implemented on top of this scan and inherits the bug.

The existing bionic test TEST(wchar, wcspbrk) in tests/wchar_test.cpp only uses ASCII input, so it does not catch this. A test such as EXPECT_EQ(3u, wcscspn(L"aĀb\n", L"x\n")) would.

Real-world impact

Visual Pinball on Android (libwinevbs, a Unix build of Wine's vbscript engine) stopped loading any table whose VBScript source contains a comment with an emoji after the September update: the lexer uses wcspbrk(ptr, L"\n\r") to skip comments, got the position of the first emoji instead of the line end, and reported "Invalid character". FileSystem.MoveFolder likewise treated every path containing a character >= U+0100 as a wildcard pattern via wcspbrk(src, L"*?><").

Worked around downstream by replacing the calls with plain loops: vpinball/libwinevbs#41 (shipped in vpinball/vpinball@e7837322f4).

Full disassembly of the affected functions and the probe sources are available on request.

I am using a supported NDK

I have checked and the NDK I'm using is currently supported

Affected versions

r29

yeah, that all sounds correct, and seems to still be an issue at ToT.

(i was going to say "you know you can just look at the source?", but android-latest-release seems to still be too old to have any of these changes from april :-( )

wcspbrk() is affected because it's just

__attribute__((__flatten__))
wchar_t* wcspbrk(const wchar_t* s, const wchar_t* delims) {
  size_t i = wcscspn(s, delims);
  if (s[i] != L'\0') return const_cast<wchar_t*>(s) + i;
  return nullptr;
}

but i'll add both missing tests, and ideally try to see if i can find everywhere else we're missing a test that actually uses non-ascii!

i'll also see if i can get the fix backported to minimize the number of affected devices. (which is probably a reason to ensure any not-directly-related tests are added in a separate later change.)

gah, even more embarrassing is that we do have an existing test for wcscspn(), it's just wrong:

[ RUN      ] wchar.wcscspn
bionic/tests/wchar_test.cpp:(1475) Failure in test wchar.wcscspn
Expected equality of these values:
  2u
    Which is: 2
  wcscspn(L"he\ufffelo", L"lo")
    Which is: 3
wchar.wcscspn exited with exitcode 1.

🤦

Thanks for the quick response. It's indeed unfortunate that the source is not available (yet).

Sorry if it sounds dramatic, because it's not. I'm just worried. Something feels wrong with this...

Since Google decided to close AOSP source code, a lot of issues have been flourishing without any kind of fix, and there's no transparency from the Google part...

Is there any movement regarding how this is going to be managed? I mean, not this bug, but the issues regarding the management of the AOSP project.

Is there any movement regarding how this is going to be managed? I mean, not this bug, but the issues regarding the management of the AOSP project.

source.android.com (in particular, https://source.android.com/docs/whatsnew/site-updates?year=2026#aosp-changes) has official communication on this topic.

(i was going to say "you know you can just look at the source?", but android-latest-release seems to still be too old to have any of these changes from april :-( )

FWIW, android-latest-release is a manifest branch, and android17-release is the git branch. The android 17 sources for bionic are in https://android.googlesource.com/platform/bionic/+/refs/heads/android17-release.

Yes, but where is the source code for Android 17 QPR1 which is what is actually running on Pixel and has been stable for over a month...

There must be a better location to discuss these general issues?

Add Oct 14 tech news (incremental scan window 06:13-07:0x UTC Oct 14 …

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

[BUG] bionic: wcscspn()/wcspbrk() treat every wchar_t >= 0x100 as a match (Android 17, CP3A.260905.009) #2260

Description

Affected / unaffected

Reproducer

Mechanism (from the shipped libc.so)

Real-world impact

I am using a supported NDK

Affected versions

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

[BUG] bionic: wcscspn()/wcspbrk() treat every wchar_t >= 0x100 as a match (Android 17, CP3A.260905.009) #2260

Description

Description

Affected / unaffected

Reproducer

Mechanism (from the shipped libc.so)

Real-world impact

I am using a supported NDK

Affected versions

Activity

enh-google commented on Oct 12, 2026

enh-google commented on Oct 12, 2026

francisdb commented on Oct 13, 2026

joaquinvacas commented on Oct 13, 2026

pirama-arumuga-nainar commented on Oct 13, 2026

zenczykowski commented on Oct 13, 2026

francisdb commented on Oct 13, 2026

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions