This patch adds a new CFGStmt sub-class, CFGConstructor, which replaces
the regular CFGStmt with CXXConstructExpr in it whenever the CFG has additional
information to provide regarding what sort of object is being constructed.
It is useful for figuring out what memory is initialized in client of the
CFG such as the Static Analyzer, which do not operate by recursive AST
traversal, but instead rely on the CFG to provide all the information when they
need it. Otherwise, the statement that triggers the construction and defines
what memory is being initialized would normally occur after the
construct-expression, and the client would need to peek to the next CFG element
or use statement parent map to understand the necessary facts about
the construct-expression.
As a proof of concept, CFGConstructors are added for new-expressions
and the respective test cases are provided to demonstrate how it works.
For now, the only additional data contained in the CFGConstructor element is
the "trigger statement", such as new-expression, which is the parent of the
constructor. It will be significantly expanded in later commits. The additional
data is organized as an auxiliary structure - the "construction context",
which is allocated separately from the CFGElement.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42672
llvm-svn: 324668
This allows the analyzer to analyze ("inline") custom operator new() calls and,
even more importantly, inline constructors of objects that were allocated
by any operator new() - not necessarily a custom one.
All changes in the tests in the current commit are intended improvements,
even if they didn't carry any explicit FIXME flag.
It is possible to restore the old behavior via
-analyzer-config c++-allocator-inlining=false
(this flag is supported by scan-build as well, and it can be into a clang
--analyze invocation via -Xclang .. -Xclang ..). There is no intention to
remove the old behavior for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42219
rdar://problem/12180598
llvm-svn: 323373
This patch introduces a new CFG element CFGLoopExit that indicate when a loop
ends. It does not deal with returnStmts yet (left it as a TODO).
It hidden behind a new analyzer-config flag called cfg-loopexit (false by
default).
Test cases added.
The main purpose of this patch right know is to make loop unrolling and loop
widening easier and more efficient. However, this information can be useful for
future improvements in the StaticAnalyzer core too.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35668
llvm-svn: 311235
This feature allows the analyzer to consider loops to completely unroll.
New requirements/rules (for unrolling) can be added easily via ASTMatchers.
Right now it is hidden behind a flag, the aim is to find the correct heuristic
and create a solution which results higher coverage % and more precise
analysis, thus can be enabled by default.
Right now the blocks which belong to an unrolled loop are marked by the
LoopVisitor which adds them to the ProgramState.
Then whenever we encounter a CFGBlock in the processCFGBlockEntrance which is
marked then we skip its investigating. That means, it won't be considered to
be visited more than the maximal bound for visiting since it won't be checked.
llvm-svn: 309006
requirements/rules (for unrolling) can be added easily via ASTMatchers.
The current implementation is hidden behind a flag.
Right now the blocks which belong to an unrolled loop are marked by the
LoopVisitor which adds them to the ProgramState. Then whenever we encounter a
CFGBlock in the processCFGBlockEntrance which is marked then we skip its
investigating. That means, it won't be considered to be visited more than the
maximal bound for visiting since it won't be checked.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34260
llvm-svn: 308558
Summary:
This mimics the implementation for the implicit destructors. The
generation of this scope leaving elements is hidden behind
a flag to the CFGBuilder, thus it should not affect existing code.
Currently, I'm missing a test (it's implicitly tested by the clang-tidy
lifetime checker that I'm proposing).
I though about a test using debug.DumpCFG, but then I would
have to add an option to StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions
to enable the scope leaving CFGElement,
which would only be useful to that particular test.
Any other ideas how I could make a test for this feature?
Reviewers: krememek, jordan_rose
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15031
llvm-svn: 307759
This makes the analyzer around 10% slower by default,
allowing it to find deeper bugs.
Default values for the following -analyzer-config change:
max-nodes: 150000 -> 225000;
max-inlinable-size: 50 -> 100.
rdar://problem/32539666
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34277
llvm-svn: 305900
We have several reports of false positives coming from libc++. For example,
there are reports of false positives in std::regex, std::wcout, and also
a bunch of issues are reported in https://reviews.llvm.org/D30593. In many
cases, the analyzer trips over the complex libc++ code invariants. Let's turn
off the reports coming from these headers until we can re-evalate the support.
We can turn this back on once we individually suppress all known false
positives and perform deeper evaluation on large codebases that use libc++.
We'd also need to commit to doing these evaluations regularly as libc++
headers change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30798
llvm-svn: 297429
Summary:
This provides a better interface for clang-tidy and encapsulates the knowledge
about experimental checkers instead of leaving this to the clients.
Reviewers: zaks.anna
Subscribers: a.sidorin, NoQ, dcoughlin, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26310
llvm-svn: 286218
The problem that caused the msvc crash has been indentified and fixed
in the previous commit. This patch contains the rest of r283092.
llvm-svn: 283584
These diagnostics are separate from the path-sensitive engine's path notes,
and can be added manually on top of path-sensitive or path-insensitive reports.
The new note diagnostics would appear as note:-diagnostic on console and
as blue bubbles in scan-build. In plist files they currently do not appear,
because format needs to be discussed with plist file users.
The analyzer option "-analyzer-config notes-as-events=true" would convert
notes to normal path notes, and put them at the beginning of the path.
This is a temporary hack to show the new notes in plist files.
A few checkers would be updated in subsequent commits,
including tests for this new feature.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24278
llvm-svn: 283092
Summary:
Dear All,
We have been looking at the following problem, where any code after the constant bound loop is not analyzed because of the limit on how many times the same block is visited, as described in bugzillas #7638 and #23438. This problem is of interest to us because we have identified significant bugs that the checkers are not locating. We have been discussing a solution involving ranges as a longer term project, but I would like to propose a patch to improve the current implementation.
Example issue:
```
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; ++i) {...something...}
int *p = 0;
*p = 0xDEADBEEF;
```
The proposal is to go through the first and last iterations of the loop. The patch creates an exploded node for the approximate last iteration of constant bound loops, before the max loop limit / block visit limit is reached. It does this by identifying the variable in the loop condition and finding the value which is “one away” from the loop being false. For example, if the condition is (x < 10), then an exploded node is created where the value of x is 9. Evaluating the loop body with x = 9 will then result in the analysis continuing after the loop, providing x is incremented.
The patch passes all the tests, with some modifications to coverage.c, in order to make the ‘function_which_gives_up’ continue to give up, since the changes allowed the analysis to progress past the loop.
This patch does introduce possible false positives, as a result of not knowing the state of variables which might be modified in the loop. I believe that, as a user, I would rather have false positives after loops than do no analysis at all. I understand this may not be the common opinion and am interested in hearing your views. There are also issues regarding break statements, which are not considered. A more advanced implementation of this approach might be able to consider other conditions in the loop, which would allow paths leading to breaks to be analyzed.
Lastly, I have performed a study on large code bases and I think there is little benefit in having “max-loop” default to 4 with the patch. For variable bound loops this tends to result in duplicated analysis after the loop, and it makes little difference to any constant bound loop which will do more than a few iterations. It might be beneficial to lower the default to 2, especially for the shallow analysis setting.
Please let me know your opinions on this approach to processing constant bound loops and the patch itself.
Regards,
Sean Eveson
SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment Group
Reviewers: jordan_rose, krememek, xazax.hun, zaks.anna, dcoughlin
Subscribers: krememek, xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12358
llvm-svn: 251621
Add an option (-analyzer-config min-blocks-for-inline-large=14) to control the function
size the inliner considers as large, in relation to "max-times-inline-large". The option
defaults to the original hard coded behaviour, which I believe should be adjustable with
the other inlining settings.
The analyzer-config test has been modified so that the analyzer will reach the
getMinBlocksForInlineLarge() method and store the result in the ConfigTable, to ensure it
is dumped by the debug checker.
A patch by Sean Eveson!
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12406
llvm-svn: 247463
This silences false positives (leaks, use of uninitialized value) in simple
code that uses containers such as std::vector and std::list. The analyzer
cannot reason about the internal invariances of those data structures which
leads to false positives. Until we come up with a better solution to that
problem, let's just not inline the methods of the containers and allow objects
to escape whenever such methods are called.
This just extends an already existing flag "c++-container-inlining" and applies
the heuristic not only to constructors and destructors of the containers, but
to all of their methods.
We have a bunch of distinct user reports all related to this issue
(radar://16058651, radar://16580751, radar://16384286, radar://16795491
[PR19637]).
llvm-svn: 211832
instead of report-XXXXXX.html, scan-build/clang analyzer generate
report-<filename>-<function, method name>-<function position>-<id>.html.
(id = i++ for several issues found in the same function/method)
llvm-svn: 210970
This will let us stage in the modeling of operator new. The -analyzer-config
opton 'c++-inline-allocators' is currently off by default.
Patch by Karthik Bhat!
llvm-svn: 201122
The analyzer doesn't currently expect CFG blocks with terminators to be
empty, but this can happen when generating conditional destructors for
a complex logical expression, such as (a && (b || Temp{})). Moreover,
the branch conditions for these expressions are not persisted in the
state. Even for handling noreturn destructors this needs more work.
This reverts r186498.
llvm-svn: 186925
Summary:
This patch enables ExprEndgine to reason about temporary object destructors.
However, these destructor calls are never inlined, since this feature is still
broken. Still, this is sufficient to properly handle noreturn temporary
destructors and close bug #15599. I have also enabled the cfg-temporary-dtors
analyzer option by default.
Reviewers: jordan_rose
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1131
llvm-svn: 186498
The analyzer can't see the reference count for shared_ptr, so it doesn't
know whether a given destruction is going to delete the referenced object.
This leads to spurious leak and use-after-free warnings.
For now, just ban destructors named '~shared_ptr', which catches
std::shared_ptr, std::tr1::shared_ptr, and boost::shared_ptr.
PR15987
llvm-svn: 182071
Previously, we’ve used the last location of the analyzer issue path as the location of the
report. This might not provide the best user experience, when one analyzer a source
file and the issue appears in the header. Introduce an option to use the last location
of the path that is in the main source file as the report location.
New option can be enabled with -analyzer-config report-in-main-source-file=true.
llvm-svn: 182058
This turns on not only destructor inlining, but inlining of constructors
for types with non-trivial destructors. Per r178516, we will still not
inline the constructor or destructor of anything that looks like a
container unless the analyzer-config option 'c++-container-inlining' is
set to 'true'.
In addition to the more precise path-sensitive model, this allows us to
catch simple smart pointer issues:
#include <memory>
void test() {
std::auto_ptr<int> releaser(new int[4]);
} // memory allocated with 'new[]' should not be deleted with 'delete'
<rdar://problem/12295363>
llvm-svn: 178805
This is a heuristic to make up for the fact that the analyzer doesn't
model C++ containers very well. One example is modeling that
'std::distance(I, E) == 0' implies 'I == E'. In the future, it would be
nice to model this explicitly, but for now it just results in a lot of
false positives.
The actual heuristic checks if the base type has a member named 'begin' or
'iterator'. If so, we treat the constructors and destructors of that type
as opaque, rather than inlining them.
This is intended to drastically reduce the number of false positives
reported with experimental destructor support turned on. We can tweak the
heuristic in the future, but we'd rather err on the side of false negatives
for now.
<rdar://problem/13497258>
llvm-svn: 178516
This is controlled by the 'suppress-c++-stdlib' analyzer-config flag.
It is currently off by default.
This is more suppression than we'd like to do, since obviously there can
be user-caused issues within 'std', but it gives us the option to wield
a large hammer to suppress false positives the user likely can't work
around.
llvm-svn: 178513
The second modification does not lead to any visible result, but, theoretically, is what we should
have been looking at to begin with since we are checking if the node was assumed to be null in
an inlined function.
llvm-svn: 176576
This enables constructor inlining for types with non-trivial destructors.
The plan is to enable destructor inlining within the next month, but that
needs further verification.
<rdar://problem/12295329>
llvm-svn: 176200
Redefine the shallow mode to inline all functions for which we have a
definite definition (ipa=inlining). However, only inline functions that
are up to 4 basic blocks large and cut the max exploded nodes generated
per top level function in half.
This makes shallow faster and allows us to keep inlining small
functions. For example, we would keep inlining wrapper functions and
constructors/destructors.
With the new shallow, it takes 104s to analyze sqlite3, whereas
the deep mode is 658s and previous shallow is 209s.
llvm-svn: 173958
The idea is to introduce a higher level "user mode" option for
different use scenarios. For example, if one wants to run the analyzer
for a small project each time the code is built, they would use
the "shallow" mode.
The user mode option will influence the default settings for the
lower-level analyzer options. For now, this just influences the ipa
modes, but we plan to find more optimal settings for them.
llvm-svn: 173386
The idea is to eventually place all analyzer options under
"analyzer-config". In addition, this lays the ground for introduction of
a high-level analyzer mode option, which will influence the
default setting for IPAMode.
llvm-svn: 173385
Artem Dergachev