When we annotating a function header so that it could be used by other
TU, we also need to make sure the function is parsed correctly within
the same TU. So if we can find the function's implementation,
ignore the annotations, otherwise, false positive would occur.
Move the escape by value case to post call and do not escape the handle
if the function is inlined and we have analyzed the handle.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91902
The fd parameter of
```
void *mmap(void *addr, size_t length, int prot, int flags, int fd, off_t offset)
```
should be constrained to the range [0, IntMax] as that is of type int.
Constraining to the range [0, Off_tMax] would result in a crash as that is
of a signed type with the value of 0xff..f (-1).
The crash would happen when we try to apply the arg constraints.
At line 583: assert(Min <= Max), as 0 <= -1 is not satisfied
The mmap64 is fixed for the same reason.
Reviewed By: martong, vsavchenko
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92307
Support adding handle annotations to sturucture that contains
handles. All the handles referenced by the structure (direct
value or ptr) would be treated as containing the
release/use/acquire annotations directly.
Patch by Yu Shan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91223
e00629f777 "[scan-build] Fix clang++ pathname" had
removed the -MAJOR.MINOR suffix, but since presumably LLVM 7 the suffix is only
-MAJOR, so ClangCXX (i.e., the CLANG_CXX environment variable passed to
clang/tools/scan-build/libexec/ccc-analyzer) now contained a non-existing
/path/to/clang-12++ (which apparently went largely unnoticed as
clang/tools/scan-build/libexec/ccc-analyzer falls back to just 'clang++' if the
executable denoted by CLANG_CXX does not exist).
For the new clang/test/Analysis/scan-build/cxx-name.test to be effective,
%scan-build must now take care to pass the clang executable's resolved pathname
(i.e., ending in .../clang-MAJOR rather than just .../clang) to --use-analyzer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89481
It is no longer needed to add summaries of 'getline' for different
possible underlying types of ssize_t. We can just simply lookup the
type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88092
The summary and very short discussion in D82122 summarizes whats happening here.
In short, liveness talks about variables, or expressions, anything that
has a value. Well, statements just simply don't have a one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82598
Add the BufferSize argument constraint to fread and fwrite. This change
itself makes it possible to discover a security critical case, described
in SEI-CERT ARR38-C.
We also add the not-null constraint on the 3rd arguments.
In this patch, I also remove those lambdas that don't take any
parameters (Fwrite, Fread, Getc), thus making the code better
structured.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87081
Previously, it was a tedious task to comprehend Z3 dumps.
We will use the same name prefix just as we use in the corresponding dump method
For all `SymbolData` values:
`$###` -> `conj_$###`
`$###` -> `derived_$###`
`$###` -> `extent_$###`
`$###` -> `meta_$###`
`$###` -> `reg_$###`
Reviewed By: xazax.hun,mikhail.ramalho
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86223
We did not evaluate such expressions, just returned `Unknown` for such cases.
After this patch, we will be able to access a unique value identifying a template instantiation via the value of the `PRETTY_FUNCTION` predefined expression.
Reviewed By: vsavchenko
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87004
Based on the discussion in D82598#2171312. Thanks @NoQ!
D82598 is titled "Get rid of statement liveness, because such a thing doesn't
exist", and indeed, expressions express a value, non-expression statements
don't.
if (a && get() || []{ return true; }())
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ has a value
~ has a value
~~~~~~~~~~ has a value
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ has a value
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ doesn't have a value
That is simple enough, so it would only make sense if we only assigned symbolic
values to expressions in the static analyzer. Yet the interface checkers can
access presents, among other strange things, the following two methods:
ProgramState::BindExpr(const Stmt *S, const LocationContext *LCtx, SVal V,
bool Invalidate=true)
ProgramState::getSVal(const Stmt *S, const LocationContext *LCtx)
So, what gives? Turns out, we make an exception for ReturnStmt (which we'll
leave for another time) and ObjCForCollectionStmt. For any other loops, in order
to know whether we should analyze another iteration, among other things, we
evaluate it's condition. Which is a problem for ObjCForCollectionStmt, because
it simply doesn't have one (CXXForRangeStmt has an implicit one!). In its
absence, we assigned the actual statement with a concrete 1 or 0 to indicate
whether there are any more iterations left. However, this is wildly incorrect,
its just simply not true that the for statement has a value of 1 or 0, we can't
calculate its liveness because that doesn't make any sense either, so this patch
turns it into a GDM trait.
Fixing this allows us to reinstate the assert removed in
https://reviews.llvm.org/rG032b78a0762bee129f33e4255ada6d374aa70c71.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86736
In short, macro expansions handled the case where a variadic parameter mapped to
multiple arguments, but not the other way around. An internal ticket was
submitted that demonstrated that we fail an assertion. Macro expansion so far
worked by lexing the source code token-by-token and using the Preprocessor to
turn these tokens into identifiers or just get their proper spelling, but what
this counter intuitively doesn't do, is actually expand these macros, so we have
to do the heavy lifting -- in this case, figure out what __VA_ARGS__ expands
into. Since this case can only occur in a nested macro, the information we
gathered from the containing macro does contain this information. If a parameter
resolves to __VA_ARGS__, we need to temporarily stop getting our tokens from the
lexer, and get the tokens from what __VA_ARGS__ maps to.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86135
There are 2 reasons to remove strcasecmp and strncasecmp.
1) They are also modeled in CStringChecker and the related argumentum
contraints are checked there.
2) The argument constraints are checked in CStringChecker::evalCall.
This is fundamentally flawed, they should be checked in checkPreCall.
Even if we set up CStringChecker as a weak dependency for
StdLibraryFunctionsChecker then the latter reports the warning always.
Besides, CStringChecker fails to discover the constraint violation
before the call, so, its evalCall returns with `true` and then
StdCLibraryFunctions also tries to evaluate, this causes an assertion
in CheckerManager.
Either we fix CStringChecker to handle the call prerequisites in
checkPreCall, or we must not evaluate any pure functions in
StdCLibraryFunctions that are also handled in CStringChecker.
We do the latter in this patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87239
We want the generice StdLibraryFunctionsChecker to report only if there
are no specific checkers that would handle the argument constraint for a
function.
Note, the assumptions are still evaluated, even if the arguement
constraint checker is set to not report. This means that the assumptions
made in the generic StdLibraryFunctionsChecker should be an
over-approximation of the assumptions made in the specific checkers. But
most importantly, the assumptions should not contradict.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87240
The "restrict" keyword is illegal in C++, however, many libc
implementations use the "__restrict" compiler intrinsic in functions
prototypes. The "__restrict" keyword qualifies a type as a restricted type
even in C++.
In case of any non-C99 languages, we don't want to match based on the
restrict qualifier because we cannot know if the given libc implementation
qualifies the paramter type or not.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87097
By using optionals, we no longer have to check the validity of types that we
get from a lookup. This way, the definition of the summaries have a declarative
form, there are no superflous conditions in the source code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86531
llvm::isa<>() and llvm::isa_and_not_null<>() template functions recently became
variadic. Unfortunately this causes crashes in case of isa_and_not_null<>()
and incorrect behavior in isa<>(). This patch fixes this issue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85728
The successfulness of a dynamic cast depends only on the C++ class, not the pointer or reference. Thus if *A is a *B, then &A is a &B,
const *A is a const *B etc. This patch changes DynamicCastInfo to store
and check the cast between the unqualified pointed/referenced types.
It also removes e.g. SubstTemplateTypeParmType from both the pointer
and the pointed type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85752
Summary:
Make exactly single NodeBuilder exists at any given time
Reviewers: NoQ, Szelethus, vsavchenko, xazax.hun
Reviewed By: NoQ
Subscribers: martong, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85796
This fix unifies all of the different ways we handled pointer to
members into one. The crash was caused by the fact that the type
of pointer-to-member values was `void *`, and while this works
for the vast majority of cases it breaks when we actually need
to explain the path for the report.
rdar://problem/64202361
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85817
Report undefined pointer dereference in similar way as null pointer dereference.
Reviewed By: NoQ
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84520
Summary:
In case a pointer iterator is incremented in a binary plus expression
(operator+), where the iterator is on the RHS, IteratorModeling should
now detect, and track the resulting value.
Reviewers: Szelethus, baloghadamsoftware
Reviewed By: baloghadamsoftware
Subscribers: rnkovacs, whisperity, xazax.hun, baloghadamsoftware, szepet, a.sidorin, mikhail.ramalho, Szelethus, donat.nagy, dkrupp, Charusso, steakhal, martong, ASDenysPetrov, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83190
The uniqueing decl in PathDiagnostic is the declaration with the
uniqueing loc, as stated by documentation comments.
It is enough to include the uniqueing loc in the profile. It is possible
to have objects with different uniqueing decl but same location, at
least with templates. These belong to the same class and should have
same profile.
Reviewed By: vsavchenko, NoQ
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84843
We found a case where Typedef Name Declarations were not being added
correctly when importing builtin types. This exposed the need for a
TypedefNameDecl visitor so these types can be added by RecordDecl and
fields.
This code is covered by the ASTImporterTest cases that use the implicit
struct __NSConstantString_tag definitions.
Thanks to @martong for the debugging assist!
Depends on D83970.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83992
Was accidentally squished into
rGb6cbe6cb0399d4671e5384dcc326af56bc6bd122. The assert fires on the code
snippet included in this commit.
More discussion can be found in https://reviews.llvm.org/D82598.
Summary:
Use the built-in functionality BugType::SuppressOnSink
instead of a manual solution in StreamChecker.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83120
Summary:
This commmit adds another relation that we can track separately from
range constraints. Symbol disequality can help us understand that
two equivalence classes are not equal to each other. We can generalize
this knowledge to classes because for every a,b,c, and d that
a == b, c == d, and b != c it is true that a != d.
As a result, we can reason about other equalities/disequalities of symbols
that we know nothing else about, i.e. no constraint ranges associated
with them. However, we also benefit from the knowledge of disequal
symbols by following the rule:
if a != b and b == C where C is a constant, a != C
This information can refine associated ranges for different classes
and reduce the number of false positives and paths to explore.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83286
Summary:
For the most cases, we try to reason about symbol either based on the
information we know about that symbol in particular or about its
composite parts. This is faster and eliminates costly brute force
searches through existing constraints.
However, we do want to support some cases that are widespread enough
and involve reasoning about different existing constraints at once.
These include:
* resoning about 'a - b' based on what we know about 'b - a'
* reasoning about 'a <= b' based on what we know about 'a > b' or 'a < b'
This commit expands on that part by tracking symbols known to be equal
while still avoiding brute force searches. It changes the way we track
constraints for individual symbols. If we know for a fact that 'a == b'
then there is no need in tracking constraints for both 'a' and 'b' especially
if these constraints are different. This additional relationship makes
dead/live logic for constraints harder as we want to maintain as much
information on the equivalence class as possible, but we still won't
carry the information that we don't need anymore.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82445
Summary:
Adding networking functions from the POSIX standard (2017). This includes
functions that deal with sockets from socket.h, netdb.h.
In 'socket.h' of some libc implementations (e.g. glibc) with C99, sockaddr
parameter is a transparent union of the underlying sockaddr_ family of pointers
instead of being a pointer to struct sockaddr. In these cases, the standardized
signature will not match, thus we try to match with another signature that has
the joker Irrelevant type. In the case of transparent unions, we also not add
those constraints which require pointer types for the sockaddr param.
Interestingly, in 'netdb.h' sockaddr is not handled as a transparent union.
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83407
Yu Shan