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
Summary:
Instead of checking the range manually, changed the checker to use assumeInclusiveRangeDual instead.
This patch was part of D28955.
Reviewers: NoQ
Reviewed By: NoQ
Subscribers: ddcc, xazax.hun, baloghadamsoftware, szepet, a.sidorin, Szelethus, donat.nagy, dkrupp, Charusso, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73062
Checkers are now required to specify whether they're creating a
path-sensitive report or a path-insensitive report by constructing an
object of the respective type.
This makes BugReporter more independent from the rest of the Static Analyzer
because all Analyzer-specific code is now in sub-classes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66572
llvm-svn: 371450
Now that we've moved to C++14, we no longer need the llvm::make_unique
implementation from STLExtras.h. This patch is a mechanical replacement
of (hopefully) all the llvm::make_unique instances across the monorepo.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66259
llvm-svn: 368942
Introduce the boolean ento::shouldRegister##CHECKERNAME(const LangOptions &LO)
function very similarly to ento::register##CHECKERNAME. This will force every
checker to implement this function, but maybe it isn't that bad: I saw a lot of
ObjC or C++ specific checkers that should probably not register themselves based
on some LangOptions (mine too), but they do anyways.
A big benefit of this is that all registry functions now register their checker,
once it is called, registration is guaranteed.
This patch is a part of a greater effort to reinvent checker registration, more
info here: D54438#1315953
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55424
llvm-svn: 352277
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
ClangCheckerRegistry is a very non-obvious, poorly documented, weird concept.
It derives from CheckerRegistry, and is placed in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend,
whereas it's base is located in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core. It was, from what I can
imagine, used to circumvent the problem that the registry functions of the
checkers are located in the clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers library, but that
library depends on clangStaticAnalyzerCore. However, clangStaticAnalyzerFrontend
depends on both of those libraries.
One can make the observation however, that CheckerRegistry has no place in Core,
it isn't used there at all! The only place where it is used is Frontend, which
is where it ultimately belongs.
This move implies that since
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ClangCheckers.h only contained a single function:
class CheckerRegistry;
void registerBuiltinCheckers(CheckerRegistry ®istry);
it had to re purposed, as CheckerRegistry is no longer available to
clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers. It was renamed to BuiltinCheckerRegistration.h,
which actually describes it a lot better -- it does not contain the registration
functions for checkers, but only those generated by the tblgen files.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54436
llvm-svn: 349275
The analyzer trims unnecessary nodes from the exploded graph before reporting
path diagnostics. However, in some cases it can trim all nodes (including the
error node), leading to an assertion failure (see
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24184).
This commit addresses the issue by adding two new APIs to CheckerContext to
explicitly create error nodes. Unless the client provides a custom tag, these
APIs tag the node with the checker's tag -- preventing it from being trimmed.
The generateErrorNode() method creates a sink error node, while
generateNonFatalErrorNode() creates an error node for a path that should
continue being explored.
The intent is that one of these two methods should be used whenever a checker
creates an error node.
This commit updates the checkers to use these APIs. These APIs
(unlike addTransition() and generateSink()) do not take an explicit Pred node.
This is because there are not any error nodes in the checkers that were created
with an explicit different than the default (the CheckerContext's Pred node).
It also changes generateSink() to require state and pred nodes (previously
these were optional) to reduce confusion.
Additionally, there were several cases where checkers did check whether a
generated node could be null; we now explicitly check for null in these places.
This commit also includes a test case written by Ying Yi as part of
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12163 (that patch originally addressed this issue but
was reverted because it introduced false positive regressions).
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12780
llvm-svn: 247859
Summary:
In clang-tidy we'd like to know the name of the checker producing each
diagnostic message. PathDiagnostic has BugType and Category fields, which are
both arbitrary human-readable strings, but we need to know the exact name of the
checker in the form that can be used in the CheckersControlList option to
enable/disable the specific checker.
This patch adds the CheckName field to the CheckerBase class, and sets it in
the CheckerManager::registerChecker() method, which gets them from the
CheckerRegistry.
Checkers that implement multiple checks have to store the names of each check
in the respective registerXXXChecker method.
Reviewers: jordan_rose, krememek
Reviewed By: jordan_rose
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2557
llvm-svn: 201186
uncovered.
This required manually correcting all of the incorrect main-module
headers I could find, and running the new llvm/utils/sort_includes.py
script over the files.
I also manually added quite a few missing headers that were uncovered by
shuffling the order or moving headers up to be main-module-headers.
llvm-svn: 169237
Kirstóf Umann