Without this patch, APSInt inherits APInt::isNegative, which merely
checks the sign bit without regard to whether the type is actually
signed. isNonNegative and isStrictlyPositive call isNegative and so
are also affected.
This patch adjusts APSInt to override isNegative, isNonNegative, and
isStrictlyPositive with implementations that consider whether the type
is signed.
A large set of Clang OpenMP tests are affected. Without this patch,
these tests assume that `true` is not a valid argument for clauses
like `collapse`. Indeed, `true` fails APInt::isStrictlyPositive but
not APSInt::isStrictlyPositive. This patch adjusts those tests to
assume `true` should be accepted.
This patch also adds tests revealing various other similar fixes due
to APSInt::isNegative calls in Clang's ExprConstant.cpp and
SemaExpr.cpp: `++` and `--` overflow in `constexpr`, evaluated object
size based on `alloc_size`, `<<` and `>>` shift count validation, and
OpenMP array section validation.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri, ABataev, hfinkel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59712
llvm-svn: 359012
This builtin has the same UI as __builtin_object_size, but has the
potential to be evaluated dynamically. It is meant to be used as a
drop-in replacement for libraries that use __builtin_object_size when
a dynamic checking mode is enabled. For instance,
__builtin_object_size fails to provide any extra checking in the
following function:
void f(size_t alloc) {
char* p = malloc(alloc);
strcpy(p, "foobar"); // expands to __builtin___strcpy_chk(p, "foobar", __builtin_object_size(p, 0))
}
This is an overflow if alloc < 7, but because LLVM can't fold the
object size intrinsic statically, it folds __builtin_object_size to
-1. With __builtin_dynamic_object_size, alloc is passed through to
__builtin___strcpy_chk.
rdar://32212419
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56760
llvm-svn: 352665
This is meant to be used with clang's __builtin_dynamic_object_size.
When 'true' is passed to this parameter, the intrinsic has the
potential to be folded into instructions that will be evaluated
at run time. When 'false', the objectsize intrinsic behaviour is
unchanged.
rdar://32212419
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56761
llvm-svn: 352664
This is a recommit of r290149, which was reverted in r290169 due to msan
failures. msan was failing because we were calling
`isMostDerivedAnUnsizedArray` on an invalid designator, which caused us
to read uninitialized memory. To fix this, the logic of the caller of
said function was simplified, and we now have a `!Invalid` assert in
`isMostDerivedAnUnsizedArray`, so we can catch this particular bug more
easily in the future.
Fingers crossed that this patch sticks this time. :)
Original commit message:
This patch does three things:
- Gives us the alloc_size attribute in clang, which lets us infer the
number of bytes handed back to us by malloc/realloc/calloc/any user
functions that act in a similar manner.
- Teaches our constexpr evaluator that evaluating some `const` variables
is OK sometimes. This is why we have a change in
test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp and other seemingly
unrelated tests. Richard Smith okay'ed this idea some time ago in
person.
- Uniques some Blocks in CodeGen, which was reviewed separately at
D26410. Lack of uniquing only really shows up as a problem when
combined with our new eagerness in the face of const.
llvm-svn: 290297
This commit fails MSan when running test/CodeGen/object-size.c in
a confusing way. After some discussion with George, it isn't really
clear what is going on here. We can make the MSan failure go away by
testing for the invalid bit, but *why* things are invalid isn't clear.
And yet, other code in the surrounding area is doing precisely this and
testing for invalid.
George is going to take a closer look at this to better understand the
nature of the failure and recommit it, for now backing it out to clean
up MSan builds.
llvm-svn: 290169
This patch does three things:
- Gives us the alloc_size attribute in clang, which lets us infer the
number of bytes handed back to us by malloc/realloc/calloc/any user
functions that act in a similar manner.
- Teaches our constexpr evaluator that evaluating some `const` variables
is OK sometimes. This is why we have a change in
test/SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp and other seemingly
unrelated tests. Richard Smith okay'ed this idea some time ago in
person.
- Uniques some Blocks in CodeGen, which was reviewed separately at
D26410. Lack of uniquing only really shows up as a problem when
combined with our new eagerness in the face of const.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D14274
llvm-svn: 290149
Joel E. Denny