This patch is intended to improve pointer arithmetic checker.
From now on it only warns when the pointer arithmetic is likely to cause an
error. For example when the pointer points to a single object, or an array of
derived types.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14203
llvm-svn: 261632
null comparison when the pointer is known to be non-null.
This catches the array to pointer decay, function to pointer decay and
address of variables. This does not catch address of function since this
has been previously used to silence a warning.
Pointer to bool conversion is under -Wbool-conversion.
Pointer to null comparison is under -Wtautological-pointer-compare, a sub-group
of -Wtautological-compare.
void foo() {
int arr[5];
int x;
// warn on these conditionals
if (foo);
if (arr);
if (&x);
if (foo == null);
if (arr == null);
if (&x == null);
if (&foo); // no warning
}
llvm-svn: 202216
In addition to enabling more code reuse, this suppresses some false positives by allowing us to
compare an element region to its base. See the ptr-arith.cpp test cases for an example.
llvm-svn: 182780
We can support the full range of comparison operations between two locations
by canonicalizing them as subtraction, as in the previous commit.
This won't work (well) if either location includes an offset, or (again)
if the comparisons are not consistent about which region comes first.
<rdar://problem/13239003>
llvm-svn: 177803
Canonicalizing these two forms allows us to better model containers like
std::vector, which use "m_start != m_finish" to implement empty() but
"m_finish - m_start" to implement size(). The analyzer should have a
consistent interpretation of these two symbolic expressions, even though
it's not properly reasoning about either one yet.
The other unfortunate thing is that while the size() expression will only
ever be written "m_finish - m_start", the comparison may be written
"m_finish == m_start" or "m_start == m_finish". Right now the analyzer does
not attempt to canonicalize those two expressions, since it doesn't know
which length expression to pick. Doing this correctly will probably require
implementing unary minus as a new SymExpr kind (<rdar://problem/12351075>).
For now, the analyzer inverts the order of arguments in the comparison to
build the subtraction, on the assumption that "begin() != end()" is
written more often than "end() != begin()". This is purely speculation.
<rdar://problem/13239003>
llvm-svn: 177801
We just treat this as opaque symbols, but even that allows us to handle
simple cases where the same condition is tested twice. This is very common
in the STL, which means that any project using the STL gets spurious errors.
Part of <rdar://problem/13239003>.
llvm-svn: 177800
This fixes several issues:
- removes egregious hack where PlistDiagnosticConsumer would forward to HTMLDiagnosticConsumer,
but diagnostics wouldn't be generated consistently in the same way if PlistDiagnosticConsumer
was used by itself.
- emitting diagnostics to the terminal (using clang's diagnostic machinery) is no longer a special
case, just another PathDiagnosticConsumer. This also magically resolved some duplicate warnings,
as we now use PathDiagnosticConsumer's diagnostic pruning, which has scope for the entire translation
unit, not just the scope of a BugReporter (which is limited to a particular ExprEngine).
As an interesting side-effect, diagnostics emitted to the terminal also have their trailing "." stripped,
just like with diagnostics emitted to plists and HTML. This required some tests to be updated, but now
the tests have higher fidelity with what users will see.
There are some inefficiencies in this patch. We currently generate the report graph (from the ExplodedGraph)
once per PathDiagnosticConsumer, which is a bit wasteful, but that could be pulled up higher in the
logic stack. There is some intended duplication, however, as we now generate different PathDiagnostics (for the same issue)
for different PathDiagnosticConsumers. This is necessary to produce the diagnostics that a particular
consumer expects.
llvm-svn: 162028
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
GRTransferFuncs had the conflated role of both constructing SVals (symbolic
expressions) as well as handling checker-specific logic. Now SValuator has the
role of constructing SVals from expressions and GRTransferFuncs just handles
checker-specific logic. The motivation is by separating these two concepts we
will be able to much more easily create richer constraint-generating logic
without coupling it to the main checker transfer function logic.
We now have one implementation of SValuator: SimpleSValuator.
SimpleSValuator is essentially the SVal-related logic that was in GRSimpleVals
(which is removed in this patch). This includes the logic for EvalBinOp,
EvalCast, etc. Because SValuator has a narrower role than the old
GRTransferFuncs, the interfaces are much simpler, and so is the implementation
of SimpleSValuator compared to GRSimpleVals. I also did a line-by-line review of
SVal-related logic in GRSimpleVals and cleaned it up while moving it over to
SimpleSValuator.
As a consequence of removing GRSimpleVals, there is no longer a
'-checker-simple' option. The '-checker-cfref' did everything that option did
but also ran the retain/release checker. Of course a user may not always wish to
run the retain/release checker, nor do we wish core analysis logic buried in the
checker-specific logic. The next step is to refactor the logic in CFRefCount.cpp
to separate out these pieces into the core analysis engine.
llvm-svn: 74229
Gabor Horvath