This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL324802: [analyzer] NFC: Assert that our fix for noreturn
destructors keeps working. (authored by dergachev, committed by ).
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42779?vs=133675&id=133737#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42779
Files:
cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
Index: cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
===================================================================
--- cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
@@ -356,20 +356,30 @@
// paths when no-return temporary destructors are used for assertions.
const AnalysisDeclContext *ADC = LCtx->getAnalysisDeclContext();
if (!ADC->getCFGBuildOptions().AddTemporaryDtors) {
- const MemRegion *Target = Call->getCXXThisVal().getAsRegion();
- if (Target && isa<CXXTempObjectRegion>(Target) &&
- Call->getDecl()->getParent()->isAnyDestructorNoReturn()) {
+ const MemRegion *Target = Call->getCXXThisVal().getAsRegion();
+ if (Target && isa<CXXTempObjectRegion>(Target) &&
+ Call->getDecl()->getParent()->isAnyDestructorNoReturn()) {
+
+ // If we've inlined the constructor, then DstEvaluated would be empty.
+ // In this case we still want a sink, which could be implemented
+ // in processCallExit. But we don't have that implemented at the moment,
+ // so if you hit this assertion, see if you can avoid inlining
+ // the respective constructor when analyzer-config cfg-temporary-dtors
+ // is set to false.
+ // Otherwise there's nothing wrong with inlining such constructor.
+ assert(!DstEvaluated.empty() &&
+ "We should not have inlined this constructor!");
for (ExplodedNode *N : DstEvaluated) {
Bldr.generateSink(CE, N, N->getState());
}
- // There is no need to run the PostCall and PostStmtchecker
+ // There is no need to run the PostCall and PostStmt checker
// callbacks because we just generated sinks on all nodes in th
// frontier.
return;
}
- }
+ }
ExplodedNodeSet DstPostCall;
getCheckerManager().runCheckersForPostCall(DstPostCall, DstEvaluated,
Index: cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
===================================================================
--- cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
@@ -356,20 +356,30 @@
// paths when no-return temporary destructors are used for assertions.
const AnalysisDeclContext *ADC = LCtx->getAnalysisDeclContext();
if (!ADC->getCFGBuildOptions().AddTemporaryDtors) {
- const MemRegion *Target = Call->getCXXThisVal().getAsRegion();
- if (Target && isa<CXXTempObjectRegion>(Target) &&
- Call->getDecl()->getParent()->isAnyDestructorNoReturn()) {
+ const MemRegion *Target = Call->getCXXThisVal().getAsRegion();
+ if (Target && isa<CXXTempObjectRegion>(Target) &&
+ Call->getDecl()->getParent()->isAnyDestructorNoReturn()) {
+
+ // If we've inlined the constructor, then DstEvaluated would be empty.
+ // In this case we still want a sink, which could be implemented
+ // in processCallExit. But we don't have that implemented at the moment,
+ // so if you hit this assertion, see if you can avoid inlining
+ // the respective constructor when analyzer-config cfg-temporary-dtors
+ // is set to false.
+ // Otherwise there's nothing wrong with inlining such constructor.
+ assert(!DstEvaluated.empty() &&
+ "We should not have inlined this constructor!");
for (ExplodedNode *N : DstEvaluated) {
Bldr.generateSink(CE, N, N->getState());
}
- // There is no need to run the PostCall and PostStmtchecker
+ // There is no need to run the PostCall and PostStmt checker
// callbacks because we just generated sinks on all nodes in th
// frontier.
return;
}
- }
+ }
ExplodedNodeSet DstPostCall;
getCheckerManager().runCheckersForPostCall(DstPostCall, DstEvaluated,
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
