We already do this for case splits introduced as a result of defensive null
checks in functions and methods, so do the same for function-like macros.
rdar://problem/19640441
llvm-svn: 259222
FindLastStoreBRVisitor is responsible for finding where a particular region
gets its value; if the region is a VarRegion, it's possible that value was
assigned at initialization, i.e. at its DeclStmt. However, if a function is
called recursively, the same DeclStmt may be evaluated multiple times in
multiple stack frames. FindLastStoreBRVisitor was not taking this into
account and just picking the first one it saw.
<rdar://problem/13787723>
llvm-svn: 180997
Improvement of r178684 and r178685.
Jordan has pointed out that I should not rely on the value of the condition to know which expression branch
has been taken. It will not work in cases the branch condition is an unknown value (ex: we do not track the constraints for floats).
The better way of doing this would be to find out if the current node is the right or left successor of the node
that has the ternary operator as a terminator (which is how this is done in other places, like ConditionBRVisitor).
llvm-svn: 178701
1) Look for the node where the condition expression is live when checking if
it is constrained to true or false.
2) Fix a bug in ProgramState::isNull, which was masking the problem. When
the expression is not a symbol (,which is the case when it is Unknown) return
unconstrained value, instead of value constrained to “false”!
(Thankfully other callers of isNull have not been effected by the bug.)
llvm-svn: 178684
Consider this case:
int *p = 0;
p = getPointerThatMayBeNull();
*p = 1;
If we inline 'getPointerThatMayBeNull', we might know that the value of 'p'
is NULL, and thus emit a null pointer dereference report. However, we
usually want to suppress such warnings as error paths, and we do so by using
FindLastStoreBRVisitor to see where the NULL came from. In this case, though,
because 'p' was NULL both before and after the assignment, the visitor
would decide that the "last store" was the initialization, not the
re-assignment.
This commit changes FindLastStoreBRVisitor to consider all PostStore nodes
that assign to this region. This still won't catches changes made directly
by checkers if they re-assign the same value, but it does handle the common
case in user-written code and will trigger ReturnVisitor's suppression
machinery as expected.
<rdar://problem/13299738>
llvm-svn: 176201
Our one basic suppression heuristic is to assume that functions do not
usually return NULL. However, when one of the arguments is NULL it is
suddenly much more likely that NULL is a valid return value. In this case,
we don't suppress the report here, but we do attach /another/ visitor to
go find out if this NULL argument also comes from an inlined function's
error path.
This new behavior, controlled by the 'avoid-suppressing-null-argument-paths'
analyzer-config option, is turned off by default. Turning it on produced
two false positives and no new true positives when running over LLVM/Clang.
This is one of the possible refinements to our suppression heuristics.
<rdar://problem/12350829>
llvm-svn: 166941
This is a heuristic intended to greatly reduce the number of false
positives resulting from inlining, particularly inlining of generic,
defensive C++ methods that live in header files. The suppression is
triggered in the cases where we ask to track where a null pointer came
from, and it turns out that the source of the null pointer was an inlined
function call.
This change brings the number of bug reports in LLVM from ~1500 down to
around ~300, a much more manageable number. Yes, some true positives may
be hidden as well, but from what I looked at the vast majority of silenced
reports are false positives, and many of the true issues found by the
analyzer are still reported.
I'm hoping to improve this heuristic further by adding some exceptions
next week (cases in which a bug should still be reported).
llvm-svn: 164449
Devin Coughlin