================
@@ -1122,10 +1131,20 @@ void
GenericTaintChecker::taintUnsafeSocketProtocol(const CallEvent &Call,
}
/// Checker registration
-void ento::registerGenericTaintChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
+void ento::registerTaintPropagationChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
Mgr.registerChecker<GenericTaintChecker>();
}
+bool ento::shouldRegisterTaintPropagationChecker(const CheckerManager &mgr) {
+ return true;
+}
+
+void ento::registerGenericTaintChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
+ GenericTaintChecker *checker = Mgr.getChecker<GenericTaintChecker>();
+ checker->isTaintReporterCheckerEnabled = true;
+ checker->reporterCheckerName = Mgr.getCurrentCheckerName();
----------------
NagyDonat wrote:
Because this way we can access the checker name specified in `Checkers.td` via
the function `Mgr.getCurrentCheckerName();`.
When the checker class corresponds to just one checker defined in `Checkers.td`
we can use the alternative constructor of `BugType` that takes the checker
object (`this`) as a first argument and then queries the name from the checker
object (which can save a _single_ name automatically).
When a single class implements multiple checkers, we need to explicitly pass
the right name to the `BugType` constructor, and so we need to either (1)
postpone the construction of the `BugType` to a point after the registration or
(2) duplicate the checker name between `Checkers.td` and the source file.
AFAIK we always choose option (1), but I didn't check this systematically.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98157
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
