================
@@ -315,16 +342,54 @@ bool
BlockInCriticalSectionChecker::isBlockingInCritSection(
void BlockInCriticalSectionChecker::checkPostCall(const CallEvent &Call,
CheckerContext &C) const {
if (isBlockingInCritSection(Call, C)) {
+ // for 'read' and 'recv' call, check whether it's file descriptor(first
+ // argument) is
+ // created by 'open' API with O_NONBLOCK flag or is equal to -1, they will
+ // not cause block in these situations, don't report
+ StringRef FuncName = Call.getCalleeIdentifier()->getName();
+ if (FuncName == "read" || FuncName == "recv") {
+ const auto *Arg = Call.getArgExpr(0);
+ if (!Arg)
+ return;
+
+ SVal SV = C.getSVal(Arg);
+ if (const auto *IntValue = SV.getAsInteger()) {
+ if (*IntValue == -1)
+ return;
+ }
+
+ SymbolRef SR = C.getSVal(Arg).getAsSymbol();
+ if (SR && C.getState()->contains<NonBlockFileDescriptor>(SR)) {
+ return;
+ }
+ }
reportBlockInCritSection(Call, C);
} else if (std::optional<MutexDescriptor> LockDesc =
checkDescriptorMatch(Call, C, /*IsLock=*/true)) {
handleLock(*LockDesc, Call, C);
} else if (std::optional<MutexDescriptor> UnlockDesc =
checkDescriptorMatch(Call, C, /*IsLock=*/false)) {
handleUnlock(*UnlockDesc, Call, C);
+ } else if (OpenFunction.matches(Call)) {
+ handleOpen(Call, C);
}
}
+void BlockInCriticalSectionChecker::checkDeadSymbols(SymbolReaper &SymReaper,
+ CheckerContext &C) const {
+ ProgramStateRef State = C.getState();
+
+ // Remove the dead symbols from the NonBlockFileDescriptor set.
+ NonBlockFileDescriptorTy Tracked = State->get<NonBlockFileDescriptor>();
+ for (SymbolRef SR : Tracked) {
+ if (SymReaper.isDead(SR)) {
+ State = State->remove<NonBlockFileDescriptor>(SR);
+ }
+ }
+
+ C.addTransition(State);
+}
+
----------------
Xazax-hun wrote:
I am fine with either the visitor or this approach. I originally wanted to sway
away from the reporter because the original solution was using AST matching too
much as opposed to working with symbols. But I think it is possible to make
this symbol-based solution work with a visitor. I agree that the visitor
approach would have less overhead as it is relatively rare that we actually
report diagnostics.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127049
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
