D105553 added NoStateChangeFuncVisitor, an abstract class to aid in creating
notes such as "Returning without writing to 'x'", or "Returning without changing
the ownership status of allocated memory". Its clients need to define, among
other things, what a change of state is.
For code like this:
f() {
g();
}
foo() {
f();
h();
}
We'd have a path in the ExplodedGraph that looks like this:
-- <g> -->
/ \
--- <f> --------> --- <h> --->
/ \ / \
-------- <foo> ------ <foo> -->
When we're interested in whether f neglected to change some property,
NoStateChangeFuncVisitor asks these questions:
÷×~
-- <g> -->
ß / \$ @&#*
--- <f> --------> --- <h> --->
/ \ / \
-------- <foo> ------ <foo> -->
Has anything changed in between # and *?
Has anything changed in between & and *?
Has anything changed in between @ and *?
...
Has anything changed in between $ and *?
Has anything changed in between × and ~?
Has anything changed in between ÷ and ~?
...
Has anything changed in between ß and *?
...
This is a rather thorough line of questioning, which is why in D105819, I was
only interested in whether state *right before* and *right after* a function
call changed, and early returned to the CallEnter location:
if (!CurrN->getLocationAs<CallEnter>())
return;
Except that I made a typo, and forgot to negate the condition. So, in this
patch, I'm fixing that, and under the same hood allow all clients to decide to
do this whole-function check instead of the thorough one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108695
D105553 added NoStateChangeFuncVisitor, an abstract class to aid in creating
notes such as "Returning without writing to 'x'", or "Returning without changing
the ownership status of allocated memory". Its clients need to define, among
other things, what a change of state is.
For code like this:
f() {
g();
}
foo() {
f();
h();
}
We'd have a path in the ExplodedGraph that looks like this:
-- <g> -->
/ \
--- <f> --------> --- <h> --->
/ \ / \
-------- <foo> ------ <foo> -->
When we're interested in whether f neglected to change some property,
NoStateChangeFuncVisitor asks these questions:
÷×~
-- <g> -->
ß / \$ @&#*
--- <f> --------> --- <h> --->
/ \ / \
-------- <foo> ------ <foo> -->
Has anything changed in between # and *?
Has anything changed in between & and *?
Has anything changed in between @ and *?
...
Has anything changed in between $ and *?
Has anything changed in between × and ~?
Has anything changed in between ÷ and ~?
...
Has anything changed in between ß and *?
...
This is a rather thorough line of questioning, which is why in D105819, I was
only interested in whether state *right before* and *right after* a function
call changed, and early returned to the CallEnter location:
if (!CurrN->getLocationAs<CallEnter>())
return;
Except that I made a typo, and forgot to negate the condition. So, in this
patch, I'm fixing that, and under the same hood allow all clients to decide to
do this whole-function check instead of the thorough one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108695
`PathSensitiveBughReport` has a function to mark a symbol as interesting but
it was not possible to clear this flag. This can be useful in some cases,
so the functionality is added.
Reviewed By: NoQ
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105637
This commit adds a function to the top-class of SVal hierarchy to
provide type information about the value. That can be extremely
useful when this is the only piece of information that the user is
actually caring about.
Additionally, this commit introduces a testing framework for writing
unit-tests for symbolic values.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104550
<string> is currently the highest impact header in a clang+llvm build:
https://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-clang/llvm-include-analysis.html
One of the most common places this is being included is the APInt.h header, which needs it for an old toString() implementation that returns std::string - an inefficient method compared to the SmallString versions that it actually wraps.
This patch replaces these APInt/APSInt methods with a pair of llvm::toString() helpers inside StringExtras.h, adjusts users accordingly and removes the <string> from APInt.h - I was hoping that more of these users could be converted to use the SmallString methods, but it appears that most end up creating a std::string anyhow. I avoided trying to use the raw_ostream << operators as well as I didn't want to lose having the integer radix explicit in the code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103888
Since @bkramer bumped gtest to 1.10.0 I think it's a good time to clean
up some of my hacks.
Reviewed By: Szelethus
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102643
ImmutableSet doesn't seem like the perfect fit for the RangeSet
data structure. It is good for saving memory in a persistent
setting, but not for the case when the population of the container
is tiny. This commit replaces RangeSet implementation and
redesigns the most common operations to be more efficient.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86465
For /C++/ constructor initializers `ExprEngine:computeUnderConstruction()`
asserts that they are all member initializers. This is not neccessarily
true when this function is used to get the return value for the
construction context thus attempts to fetch return values of base and
delegating constructor initializers result in assertions. This small
patch fixes this issue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85351
It turned out that the D78704 included a private LLVM header, which is excluded
from the LLVM install target.
I'm substituting that `#include` with the public one by moving the necessary
`#define` into that. There was a discussion about this at D78704 and on the
cfe-dev mailing list.
I'm also placing a note to remind others of this pitfall.
Reviewed By: mgorny
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84929
Since strong dependencies aren't user-facing (its hardly ever legal to disable
them), lets enforce that they are hidden. Modeling checkers that aren't
dependencies are of course not impacted, but there is only so much you can do
against developers shooting themselves in the foot :^)
I also made some changes to the test files, reversing the "test" package for,
well, testing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81761
If you were around the analyzer for a while now, you must've seen a lot of
patches that awkwardly puts code from one library to the other:
* D75360 moves the constructors of CheckerManager, which lies in the Core
library, to the Frontend library. Most the patch itself was a struggle along
the library lines.
* D78126 had to be reverted because dependency information would be utilized
in the Core library, but the actual data lied in the frontend.
D78126#inline-751477 touches on this issue as well.
This stems from the often mentioned problem: the Frontend library depends on
Core and Checkers, Checkers depends on Core. The checker registry functions
(`registerMallocChecker`, etc) lie in the Checkers library in order to keep each
checker its own module. What this implies is that checker registration cannot
take place in the Core, but the Core might still want to use the data that
results from it (which checker/package is enabled, dependencies, etc).
D54436 was the patch that initiated this. Back in the days when CheckerRegistry
was super dumb and buggy, it implemented a non-documented solution to this
problem by keeping the data in the Core, and leaving the logic in the Frontend.
At the time when the patch landed, the merger to the Frontend made sense,
because the data hadn't been utilized anywhere, and the whole workaround without
any documentation made little sense to me.
So, lets put the data back where it belongs, in the Core library. This patch
introduces `CheckerRegistryData`, and turns `CheckerRegistry` into a short lived
wrapper around this data that implements the logic of checker registration. The
data is tied to CheckerManager because it is required to parse it.
Side note: I can't help but cringe at the fact how ridiculously awkward the
library lines are. I feel like I'm thinking too much inside the box, but I guess
this is just the price of keeping the checkers so modularized.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82585
FalsePositiveRefutationBRVisitor had a bug where the constraints were not
properly collected thus crosschecked with Z3.
This patch demonstratest and fixes that bug.
Bug:
The visitor wanted to collect all the constraints on a BugPath.
Since it is a visitor, it stated the visitation of the BugPath with the node
before the ErrorNode. As a final step, it visited the ErrorNode explicitly,
before it processed the collected constraints.
In principle, the ErrorNode should have visited before every other node.
Since the constraints were collected into a map, mapping each symbol to its
RangeSet, if the map already had a mapping with the symbol, then it was skipped.
This behavior was flawed if:
We already had a constraint on a symbol, but at the end in the ErrorNode we have
a tighter constraint on that. Therefore, this visitor would not utilize that
tighter constraint during the crosscheck validation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78457
Adds the test infrastructure for testing the FalsePositiveRefutationBRVisitor.
It will be extended in the D78457 patch, which demonstrates and fixes a bug in
the visitor.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78704
Adds the test infrastructure for testing the FalsePositiveRefutationBRVisitor.
It will be extended in the D78457 patch, which demonstrates and fixes a bug in
the visitor.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78704
Checker dependencies were added D54438 to solve a bug where the checker names
were incorrectly registered, for example, InnerPointerChecker would incorrectly
emit diagnostics under the name MallocChecker, or vice versa [1]. Since the
system over the course of about a year matured, our expectations of what a role
of a dependency and a dependent checker should be crystallized a bit more --
D77474 and its summary, as well as a variety of patches in the stack
demonstrates how we try to keep dependencies to play a purely modeling role. In
fact, D78126 outright forbids diagnostics under a dependency checkers name.
These dependencies ensured the registration order and enabling only when all
dependencies are satisfied. This was a very "strong" contract however, that
doesn't fit the dependency added in D79420. As its summary suggests, this
relation is directly in between diagnostics, not modeling -- we'd prefer a more
specific warning over a general one.
To support this, I added a new dependency kind, weak dependencies. These are not
as strict of a contract, they only express a preference in registration order.
If a weak dependency isn't satisfied, the checker may still be enabled, but if
it is, checker registration, and transitively, checker callback evaluation order
is ensured.
If you are not familiar with the TableGen changes, a rather short description
can be found in the summary of D75360. A lengthier one is in D58065.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqKeqHRAhQM
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80905
Exactly what it says on the tin! "Strong" dependencies are mentioned in contrast
to a new kind of dependency introduced in a followup patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80901
We're only using the D2 iteration value inside the assert (the only component of the loop) - move the entire loop inside the assert by using llvm::all_of.
Retrieving the parameter location of functions was disabled because it
may causes crashes due to the fact that functions may have multiple
declarations and without definition it is difficult to ensure that
always the same declration is used. Now parameters are stored in
`ParamRegions` which are independent of the declaration of the function,
therefore the same parameters always have the same regions,
independently of the function declaration used actually. This allows us
to remove the limitation described above.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80286
Currently, parameters of functions without their definition present cannot
be represented as regions because it would be difficult to ensure that the
same declaration is used in every case. To overcome this, we split
`VarRegion` to two subclasses: `NonParamVarRegion` and `ParamVarRegion`.
The latter does not store the `Decl` of the parameter variable. Instead it
stores the index of the parameter which enables retrieving the actual
`Decl` every time using the function declaration of the stack frame. To
achieve this we also removed storing of `Decl` from `DeclRegion` and made
`getDecl()` pure virtual. The individual `Decl`s are stored in the
appropriate subclasses, such as `FieldRegion`, `ObjCIvarRegion` and the
newly introduced `NonParamVarRegion`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80522
Checkers should be able to get the return value under construction for a
`CallEvenet`. This patch adds a function to achieve this which retrieves
the return value from the construction context of the call.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80366
Summary:
CompoundLiteralRegions have been properly modeled before, but
'getBindingForElement` was not changed to accommodate this change
properly.
rdar://problem/46144644
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78990
Summary:
This fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41588
RangeSet Negate function shall handle unsigned ranges as well as signed ones.
RangeSet getRangeForMinusSymbol function shall use wider variety of ranges, not only concrete value ranges.
RangeSet Intersect functions shall not produce assertions.
Changes:
Improved safety of RangeSet::Intersect function. Added isEmpty() check to prevent an assertion.
Added support of handling unsigned ranges to RangeSet::Negate and RangeSet::getRangeForMinusSymbol.
Extended RangeSet::getRangeForMinusSymbol to return not only range sets with single value [n,n], but with wide ranges [n,m].
Added unit test for Negate function.
Added regression tests for unsigned values.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77802
One of the pain points in simplifying MallocCheckers interface by gradually
changing to CallEvent is that a variety of C++ allocation and deallocation
functionalities are modeled through preStmt<...> where CallEvent is unavailable,
and a single one of these callbacks can prevent a mass parameter change.
This patch introduces a new CallEvent, CXXDeallocatorCall, which happens after
preStmt<CXXDeleteExpr>, and can completely replace that callback as
demonstrated.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75430
This reverts commit 97aa593a83 as it
causes problems (PR45453) https://reviews.llvm.org/D77574#1966321.
This additionally adds an explicit reference to FrontendOpenMP to
clang-tidy where ASTMatchers is used.
This is hopefully just a temporary solution. The dependence on
`FrontendOpenMP` from `ASTMatchers` should be handled by CMake
implicitly, not us explicitly.
Reviewed By: aheejin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77666
Summary:
ASTMatchers is used in various places and it now exposes the
LLVMFrontendOpenMP library to its users without them needing to depend
on it explicitly.
Reviewers: lebedev.ri
Subscribers: mgorny, yaxunl, bollu, guansong, martong, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77574
Move the listing of allowed clauses per OpenMP directive to the new
macro file in `llvm/Frontend/OpenMP`. Also, use a single generic macro
that specifies the directive and one allowed clause explicitly instead
of a dedicated macro per directive.
We save 800 loc and boilerplate for all new directives/clauses with no
functional change. We also need to include the macro file only once and
not once per directive.
Depends on D77112.
Reviewed By: JonChesterfield
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77113
Some checkers may not only depend on language options but also analyzer options.
To make this possible this patch changes the parameter of the shouldRegister*
function to CheckerManager to be able to query the analyzer options when
deciding whether the checker should be registered.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75271
`CheckerRegistry` registers a checker either if it is excplicitly
enabled or it is a dependency of an explicitly enabled checker and is
not explicitly disabled. In both cases it is also important that the
checker should be registered (`shoudRegister`//XXX//`()` returns true).
Currently there is a bug here: if the dependenct checker is not
explicitly disabled it is registered regardless of whether it should
be registered. This patch fixes this bug.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75842
Nothing exciting to see here! The new interface allows for more fine tuning
(register but disable a checker, add custom checker registry functions, etc),
that was basically the point.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67335
Summary:
This patch hooks the `Preprocessor` trough `BugReporter` to the
`CheckerContext` so the checkers could look for macro definitions.
Reviewed By: NoQ
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69731
This is how it should've been and brings it more in line with
std::string_view. There should be no functional change here.
This is mostly mechanical from a custom clang-tidy check, with a lot of
manual fixups. It uncovers a lot of minor inefficiencies.
This doesn't actually modify StringRef yet, I'll do that in a follow-up.
Traditionally, clang-tidy uses the term check, and the analyzer uses checker,
but in the very early years, this wasn't the case, and code originating from the
early 2010's still incorrectly refer to checkers as checks.
This patch attempts to hunt down most of these, aiming to refer to checkers as
checkers, but preserve references to callback functions (like checkPreCall) as
checks.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140
llvm-svn: 371760
Kristóf Umann