xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StackAddrEscapeChecker.cpp:145
+ if (dyn_cast_or_null<StackSpaceRegion>(Region->getMemorySpace())) {
+ ExplodedNode *N = C.generateErrorNode();
+ if (!N)
----------------
This will stop the analysis on this execution path. Is this desired? Usually,
we stop the execution when there is no way to model the program state after the
error, e.g.: after a division by zero. In this case the stack address escaped
but it wasn't dereferenced (yet), so I think it might be safe to continue the
analysis on this path. What do you think?
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StackAddrEscapeChecker.cpp:156
+ "asynchronously";
+ auto report =
+ llvm::make_unique<BugReport>(*BT_capturestackleak, Out.str(), N);
----------------
The variable should start with an uppercase letter.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39438
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
