Author: george.karpenkov Date: Tue Jan 2 15:05:47 2018 New Revision: 321682
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=321682&view=rev Log: [analyzer] do not crash with assertion on processing locations of bodyfarmed functions This addresses an issue introduced in r183451: since `removePiecesWithInvalidLocations` is called *after* `adjustCallLocations`, it is not necessary, and in fact harmful, to have this assertion in adjustCallLocations. Addresses rdar://36170689 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41680 Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/call_once.cpp Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp?rev=321682&r1=321681&r2=321682&view=diff ============================================================================== --- cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp (original) +++ cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp Tue Jan 2 15:05:47 2018 @@ -229,7 +229,6 @@ adjustCallLocations(PathPieces &Pieces, PathDiagnosticCallPiece *Call = dyn_cast<PathDiagnosticCallPiece>(I->get()); if (!Call) { - assert((*I)->getLocation().asLocation().isValid()); continue; } Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/call_once.cpp URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/call_once.cpp?rev=321682&r1=321681&r2=321682&view=diff ============================================================================== --- cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/call_once.cpp (original) +++ cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/call_once.cpp Tue Jan 2 15:05:47 2018 @@ -1,10 +1,11 @@ -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -verify %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBSTDCPP -verify %s +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -verify %s -o %t.report +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBSTDCPP -verify %s -o %t.report // We do NOT model libcxx03 implementation, but the analyzer should still // not crash. -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBCXX03 -verify %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBCXX03 -DEMULATE_LIBSTDCPP -verify %s +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBCXX03 -verify %s -o %t.report +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -std=c++11 -fblocks -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -DEMULATE_LIBCXX03 -DEMULATE_LIBSTDCPP -verify %s -o %t.report +// RUN: rm -rf %t.report void clang_analyzer_eval(bool); _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
