Summary:
Motivated by [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45045 | Tune inspections to a specific C++ standard. ]]
Moves the isLanguageVersionSupported virtual function from `MakeSmartPtrCheck` to the base `ClangTidyCheck` class.
This will disable registering matchers or pp callbacks on unsupported language versions for a check.
Having it as a standalone function is cleaner than manually disabling the check in the register function and should hopefully
encourage check developers to actually restrict the check based on language version.
As an added bonus this could enable automatic detection of what language version a check runs on for the purpose of documentation generation
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, gribozavr2, Eugene.Zelenko, JonasToth, alexfh, hokein
Reviewed By: gribozavr2
Subscribers: xazax.hun, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75289
Summary: Instead of dropping all the ranges associated with a Diagnostic when
converting them to a ClangTidy error, instead attach them to the ClangTidyError,
so they can be consumed by other APIs.
Patch by Joe Turner <joturner@google.com>.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69782
Summary:
symbols in libcpp are inside the inline namespace, printQualifierAsString will
print the inline namespace, which is unexpected.
Reviewers: kadircet
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75174
Summary:
Though we don't have new changes to the index format, we have changes to
symbol collector, e.g. collect marcos, spelled references. Bump the
version to force background-index to rebuild.
Reviewers: kadircet
Reviewed By: kadircet
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74127
Summary:
This fixes a clangd rename issue, which is missing the reference of
an incomplete specialization.
Unfortunately, I didn't reproduce this issue in clang-rename, I guess
the input `FoundDecl` of AdditionalUSRFinder is different in clangd vs
clang-rename, clang-rename uses the underlying CXXRecordDecl of the
ClassTemplateDecl, which is fixed in 5d862c042b;
while clangd-rename uses the ClassTemplateDecl.
Reviewers: kbobyrev
Reviewed By: kbobyrev
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74829
Summary:
Also fixes a bug, resulting from directly using ND.getEndLoc() for end
location of the range. As ND.getEndLoc() points to the begining of the last
token, whereas it should point one past the end, since LSP ranges are half open
(exclusive on the end).
Reviewers: sammccall
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74850
Summary:
Currently extract variable doesn't spell the type explicitly and just
uses an `auto` instead, which is not available in C.
Reviewers: usaxena95
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75053
This reverts commit a2ce807eb7.
Buildbot failures on GCC due to SelectionTree not being copyable, and
instantiating vector<Selection> in the tweak-handling in ClangdServer.
Summary:
It was disabled because we don't handle explicit template
specialization well (due to the index limitation).
renaming templates is normal in practic, rather than disabling it, this patch
allows to rename them though it is not perfect (just a known limitation).
Context: https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/280
Reviewers: kbobyrev
Reviewed By: kbobyrev
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74709
Summary:
Also use //check// in add_new_check.py for terminology consistency.
PS
My GitHub ID is [[ https://github.com/EugeneZelenko | EugeneZelenko ]], if it's necessary for attribution.
Reviewers: alexfh, hokein, aaron.ballman, njames93, MyDeveloperDay
Reviewed By: njames93
Subscribers: Andi, xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang-tools-extra, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73580
Summary:
libindex will canonicalize references to template instantiations:
- 1) reference to an explicit template specialization, report the specializatiion
- 2) otherwise, report the primary template
but 2) is not true for incomplete instantiations, this patch fixes this.
Fixes https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/287
Reviewers: kadircet
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, jkorous, arphaman, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74830
The change added a test that required exceptions, so enable that explicitly
so that it works on platforms that default to having exceptions disabled
(like the PS4).
Added FixItHint comments to ReservedIdentifierCheck and IdentifierNamingCheck to trick the python scripts into detecting a fix it is provided as it can't see the FixItHints in RenamerClangTidyCheck.cpp
Summary:
Make it more convinient for the clients to select completion items by
providing a set of default characters (punctuation).
Related issue: https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/284
Reviewers: sammccall
Reviewed By: sammccall
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74606
readability-redundant-expression now detects expressions where a logical
or bitwise operator had equivalent LHS and RHS where the equivalent
operands were separated by more operands.
The goal of this patch is to maximize CPU utilization on multi-socket or high core count systems, so that parallel computations such as LLD/ThinLTO can use all hardware threads in the system. Before this patch, on Windows, a maximum of 64 hardware threads could be used at most, in some cases dispatched only on one CPU socket.
== Background ==
Windows doesn't have a flat cpu_set_t like Linux. Instead, it projects hardware CPUs (or NUMA nodes) to applications through a concept of "processor groups". A "processor" is the smallest unit of execution on a CPU, that is, an hyper-thread if SMT is active; a core otherwise. There's a limit of 32-bit processors on older 32-bit versions of Windows, which later was raised to 64-processors with 64-bit versions of Windows. This limit comes from the affinity mask, which historically is represented by the sizeof(void*). Consequently, the concept of "processor groups" was introduced for dealing with systems with more than 64 hyper-threads.
By default, the Windows OS assigns only one "processor group" to each starting application, in a round-robin manner. If the application wants to use more processors, it needs to programmatically enable it, by assigning threads to other "processor groups". This also means that affinity cannot cross "processor group" boundaries; one can only specify a "preferred" group on start-up, but the application is free to allocate more groups if it wants to.
This creates a peculiar situation, where newer CPUs like the AMD EPYC 7702P (64-cores, 128-hyperthreads) are projected by the OS as two (2) "processor groups". This means that by default, an application can only use half of the cores. This situation could only get worse in the years to come, as dies with more cores will appear on the market.
== The problem ==
The heavyweight_hardware_concurrency() API was introduced so that only *one hardware thread per core* was used. Once that API returns, that original intention is lost, only the number of threads is retained. Consider a situation, on Windows, where the system has 2 CPU sockets, 18 cores each, each core having 2 hyper-threads, for a total of 72 hyper-threads. Both heavyweight_hardware_concurrency() and hardware_concurrency() currently return 36, because on Windows they are simply wrappers over std:🧵:hardware_concurrency() -- which can only return processors from the current "processor group".
== The changes in this patch ==
To solve this situation, we capture (and retain) the initial intention until the point of usage, through a new ThreadPoolStrategy class. The number of threads to use is deferred as late as possible, until the moment where the std::threads are created (ThreadPool in the case of ThinLTO).
When using hardware_concurrency(), setting ThreadCount to 0 now means to use all the possible hardware CPU (SMT) threads. Providing a ThreadCount above to the maximum number of threads will have no effect, the maximum will be used instead.
The heavyweight_hardware_concurrency() is similar to hardware_concurrency(), except that only one thread per hardware *core* will be used.
When LLVM_ENABLE_THREADS is OFF, the threading APIs will always return 1, to ensure any caller loops will be exercised at least once.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71775
Summary:
The CheckAtomic module performs two tests to determine if passing
'-latomic' to the linker is required: one for 64-bit atomics, and
another for non-64-bit atomics. clangd only uses the result from
HAVE_CXX_ATOMICS64_WITHOUT_LIB. This is incomplete because there are
uses of non-64-bit atomics in the code, such as the ReplyOnce::Replied
of type std::atomic<bool> defined in clangd/ClangdLSPServer.cpp.
Fix by also checking for the result of HAVE_CXX_ATOMICS_WITHOUT_LIB.
See also: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68964
Reviewers: ilya-biryukov, nridge, kadircet, beanz, compnerd, luismarques
Reviewed By: luismarques
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69869
Summary:
Currently template parameters has symbolkind `Unknown`. This patch
introduces a new kind `TemplateParm` for templatetemplate, templatetype and
nontypetemplate parameters.
Also adds tests in clangd hover feature.
Reviewers: sammccall
Subscribers: kristof.beyls, ilya-biryukov, jkorous, arphaman, usaxena95, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73696
That's where nowadays those tests reside, those outliers were created
before the migration but committed after,
so they just awkwardly reside in the old place.
Summary:
Recursion is a powerful tool, but like any tool
without care it can be dangerous. For example,
if the recursion is unbounded, you will
eventually run out of stack and crash.
You can of course track the recursion depth
but if it is hardcoded, there can always be some
other environment when that depth is too large,
so said magic number would need to be env-dependent.
But then your program's behavior is suddenly more env-dependent.
Also, recursion, while it does not outright stop optimization,
recursive calls are less great than normal calls,
for example they hinder inlining.
Recursion is banned in some coding guidelines:
* SEI CERT DCL56-CPP. Avoid cycles during initialization of static objects
* JPL 2.4 Do not use direct or indirect recursion.
* I'd say it is frowned upon in LLVM, although not banned
And is plain unsupported in some cases:
* OpenCL 1.2, 6.9 Restrictions: i. Recursion is not supported.
So there's clearly a lot of reasons why one might want to
avoid recursion, and replace it with worklist handling.
It would be great to have a enforcement for it though.
This implements such a check.
Here we detect both direct and indirect recursive calls,
although since clang-tidy (unlike clang static analyzer)
is CTU-unaware, if the recursion transcends a single standalone TU,
we will naturally not find it :/
The algorithm is pretty straight-forward:
1. Build call-graph for the entire TU.
For that, the existing `clang::CallGraph` is re-used,
although it had to be modified to also track the location of the call.
2. Then, the hard problem: how do we detect recursion?
Since we have a graph, let's just do the sane thing,
and look for Strongly Connected Function Declarations - widely known as `SCC`.
For that LLVM provides `llvm::scc_iterator`,
which is internally an Tarjan's DFS algorithm, and is used throught LLVM,
so this should be as performant as possible.
3. Now that we've got SCC's, we discard those that don't contain loops.
Note that there may be more than one loop in SCC!
4. For each loopy SCC, we call out each function, and print a single example
call graph that shows recursion -- it didn't seem worthwhile enumerating
every possible loop in SCC, although i suppose it could be implemented.
* To come up with that call graph cycle example, we start at first SCC node,
see which callee of the node is within SCC (and is thus known to be in cycle),
and recurse into it until we hit the callee that is already in call stack.
Reviewers: JonasToth, aaron.ballman, ffrankies, Eugene.Zelenko, erichkeane, NoQ
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: Charusso, Naghasan, bader, riccibruno, mgorny, Anastasia, xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Tags: #llvm, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72362
Karasev Nikita