[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 162942. Charusso marked an inline comment as done. Charusso retitled this revision from "[clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen" to "[clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size(

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 157916. Charusso added a comment. Excuse me for the huge patch, but what I can done wrongly, I did, so I have made tons of revision. I would like to show the current direction of the checker. Currently it has too much overlapping function, so please don't

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTerminatedResultCheck.cpp:377-381 +FixItHint::CreateInsertion(exprLocEnd(LengthExpr, Result), ") + 1"); +Diag << InsertFirstParenFix << InsertPlusOneAndSe

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 149116. Charusso added a comment. @xbolva00 idea implemented, doubled the checker's power. Now if the given argument is a DeclRefExpr this should handle it as it would be inlined as a simple CallExpr. Results: I have found 37 `memcpy()` and 2 `memchr()` er

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 149129. Charusso added a comment. Clang format. https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050 Files: clang-tidy/bugprone/BugproneTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTerminatedResultCheck.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTer

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050#1116361, @xbolva00 wrote: > memcpy(crypt_buf, passwd, passwd_len); <--- warning > memcpy(crypt_buf + passwd_len, salt, salt_len); > > This is a false warning since it appends strings using memcpy. But no idea > what to do and if it is

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050#1116446, @lebedev.ri wrote: > I would like to see more negative tests. > What does it do if the len/size is a constant? > Variable that wasn't just assigned with `strlen()` return? Thanks for the comment! What do you mean by negativ

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 150643. Charusso marked 4 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. `memchr()` revision: it is problematic if the second argument is `'\0'`, there is no other case. Added a new type of matcher, to match function calls. More static functions and tes

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso added a comment. @lebedev.ri there is all the false positive results from the last publicated result-dump: F6334659: curl-lib-curl_path-c.html second result: F6334660: ffmpeg-libavformat-sdp.c.html all result: F633

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 150644. Charusso added a comment. Clang format. https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050 Files: clang-tidy/bugprone/BugproneTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTerminatedResultCheck.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTer

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen or wcslen

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 150645. Charusso added a comment. Fix some comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050 Files: clang-tidy/bugprone/BugproneTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTerminatedResultCheck.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNul

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] WIP: Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added subscribers: baloghadamsoftware, whisperity. Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076#1260663, @george.karpenkov wrote: > The change makes sense to me, but: > > 1. Note that "Assuming X" directives are useful for the analyzer developers, > since they know that'

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso added a comment. Thanks everyone for the contribution! https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso added a subscriber: klimek. Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050#1264435, @JonasToth wrote: > Unfortunatly this check does not compile on some ARM platforms. It seems that > a matcher exceeds the recursion limit in template instantations. > > http://lab.llvm.org:

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076#1261134, @NoQ wrote: > For example, in the `inline-plist.c`'s `bar()` on line 45, Static Analyzer > indeed doesn't assume that `p` is equal to null; instead, Static Analyzer > *knows* it for sure. Thanks you! This a great example wh

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/ConstraintManager.h:202 + void finalizeConstraints() { +Constraints.clear(); + } george.karpenkov wrote: > These constraints are conceptually part of the visitor, n

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:1853 + +const auto *Cond = cast(PS->getStmt()); +auto Piece = VisitTrueTest(Cond, tag == tags.first, BRC, BR, N); george.karpenkov wrote: > How do we know that it'

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. Thanks everyone for the review! @george.karpenkov could you commit it please? I am interested in your ideas in the little discussion started with @NoQ at the beginning of the project. https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076 ___ c

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076#1276270, @george.karpenkov wrote: > @NoQ has a good point: we need to preserve the distinction between the things > analyzer "assumes" and the things analyzer "knows". Yes, but I think it should be a new patch because I would like to

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076#1276277, @NoQ wrote: > I mean, the idea of checking constraints instead of matching program points > is generally good, but the example i gave above suggests that there's a bug > somewhere. I think it is an unimplemented feature whi

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: test/Analysis/MisusedMovedObject.cpp:187 A a; -if (i == 1) { // expected-note {{Taking false branch}} expected-note {{Taking false branch}} +if (i == 1) { // expected-note {{Assuming 'i' is not equal to 1}} expected-note

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: test/Analysis/Inputs/expected-plists/cxx-for-range.cpp.plist:837 + message + Variable 'fail' is true + Double negating is not in standard English, so this behaviour is documented here. Co

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. Thanks you @NoQ! Luckily it is rely on `ProgramPoints` now. The only problem as I see the mentioned Z3-test, where I have no idea what happened. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076 ___

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso marked 8 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. @NoQ thanks you for the great explanation! I really wanted to write out known constant integers and booleans but I think 'Knowing...' pieces would be more cool. I tried to minimize the changes after a little e-mailing with @ge

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: test/Analysis/diagnostics/macros.cpp:33 void testDoubleMacro(double d) { - if (d == DBL_MAX) { // expected-note {{Taking true branch}} + if (d == DBL_MAX) { // expected-note {{Assuming 'd' is equal to DBL_MAX}} +

[PATCH] D54560: [analyzer] MoveChecker Pt.3: Improve warning messages a bit.

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54560#1301870, @NoQ wrote: > Write down full messages in tests. When the message was updated from `'x' is > moved'` to `Object 'x' is moved`, the tests were not updated because they > kept passing because the former is still a sub-string of

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076#1305209, @Szelethus wrote: > In the meanwhile we managed to figure out where the problem lays, so if > you're interested, I'm going to document it here. > > The patch attempts to solve this by inspecting the actual condition, and > tr

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. Sorry for the huge noise! It took me a while to see what is the problem. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D53076 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. @Szelethus thanks you for the comments! In D53076#1307336 , @Szelethus wrote: > I think the reason why the printed message was either along the lines of > "this is 0" and "this is non-0", is that we don't necessarily know what

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. @george.karpenkov thanks you for the comments! In D53076#1308641 , @george.karpenkov wrote: > What about just dropping the `Knowing` prefix? > Just having `arr is null, taking true bra

[PATCH] D59121: [analyzer] Fix macro names in diagnostics within bigger macros.

Charusso requested changes to this revision. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:1985 bool partOfParentMacro = false; +StringRef PName = ""; if (ParentEx->getBeginLoc().isMacroID()) { `Pa

[PATCH] D58367: [analyzer] NFC: Improve upon the concept of BugReporterVisitor.

Charusso added a comment. In D58367#1423451 , @NoQ wrote: > Found a bug! The lambda has to manually make sure that the bug report > actually does have something to do with the checker. I think message-semantic is better than storing some data in two pla

[PATCH] D54811: [analyzer] ConditionBRVisitor: Remove GDM checking

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rC356318: [analyzer] ConditionBRVisitor: Remove GDM checking (authored by Charusso, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://review

[PATCH] D57896: Variable names rule

Charusso added subscribers: chandlerc, Charusso. Charusso added a comment. In D57896#1406812 , @lattner wrote: > I can understand Zach's position here, but LLDB has historically never > conformed to the general LLVM naming or other conventions due to its

[PATCH] D57896: Variable names rule

Charusso added a comment. In D57896#1435245 , @lattner wrote: > FWIW, my suggestion is *not* to expand names like DRE to decl_ref_expr, I > agree that doesn't add clarity to the code. Two possibilities: "dre", or > "decl" which is what I would write tod

[PATCH] D58367: [analyzer] NFC: Improve upon the concept of BugReporterVisitor.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Cool! I have found this message-semantic idea useful in Unity where every `GameObject` could talk with each other in a very generic way (https://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/GameObject

[PATCH] D59857: [analyzer] PR37501: Disable the assertion for reverse-engineering logical op short circuits.

Charusso added a comment. There is no connection with my reverse-engineering reverted patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57410?id=184992 ? It evaluates the left and the right side and may it could help. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59857/new/ htt

[PATCH] D59861: [analyzer] NFC: Replace Taint API with a usual inter-checker communication API?

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I like the idea to put connecting stuff together in the same file to create more understandable code. LGTM. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Taint.h:8 +// +

[PATCH] D59901: [analyzer] PR41239: Fix a crash on invalid source location in NoStoreFuncVisitor.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Nice solution. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59901/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59901 ___

[PATCH] D59121: [analyzer] Fix macro names in diagnostics within bigger macros.

Charusso added a comment. In D59121#1448367 , @NoQ wrote: > On second thought, dunno. In the scan-build macro preview it wouldn't show > you UINT32_MAX anyway. Maybe let's keep this behavior. > > Cleaned up the patch a little bit. Somehow on the `Assumi

[PATCH] D59121: [analyzer] Fix macro names in diagnostics within bigger macros.

Charusso added a comment. In D59121#1448386 , @NoQ wrote: > Mmm, that *is* an `Assuming...` piece, i.e., this is the same code, just the > structure of macros is more complicated than usual. You told me we would like to see a value when we hover over a

[PATCH] D59121: [analyzer] Fix macro names in diagnostics within bigger macros.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. Nice catch! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59121/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59121 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/c

[PATCH] D60107: [analyzer] NoStoreFuncVisitor: Suppress bug reports with no-store in system headers.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. It is very good to try one improvement in another similar function. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:364 QualType T = PVD->getType

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] ConditionBRVisitor: Enhance to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. Thanks you @NoQ for the great idea! Without the duplicated `BugReport.cpp` reports it could be an on-by-default patch, see: Before: F8685549: before.html After: F8685550: after.html It is not per

[PATCH] D60732: [analyzer] NFC: Use -verify=... in MoveChecker tests.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I think this functionality is unused because you would split the file into six to reduce the overhead/scroll and that is it. It is a cool reveal, could you provide a documentation? Repos

[PATCH] D60845: [VerifyDiagnosticConsumer] Document -verify= in doxygen

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Thanks you! I really like live working examples, I hope not just me. Could you link https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/master/clang/test/Analysis/use-after-move.cpp as well as a li

[PATCH] D61051: [analyzer] Treat functions without runtime branches as "small".

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Great patch! There is only a design problem: You have negated every `isSmall()` condition looks like you could write `isLarge()` instead but there is no connection between these functions.

[PATCH] D61285: [analyzer] SmartPtrModeling: Fix a null dereference.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. When I see `->*` I go mad, but we should handle unknown stuff, cool patch. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61285/new/ https://reviews.llvm.or

[PATCH] D61545: [analyzer] Fix a crash in RVO from within blocks.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I think the entire `LocationContext` stuff is a huge design issue, and you used its functionality without any hack. If you would rename the `getStackFrame` to `getNextStackFrame` or someth

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 166802. Charusso marked 28 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. - Refactor and better English thanks for @whisperity! - Removed `InjectUL` option so the checker handles the special case if the capacity of a buffer is `int.Max()` https://revi

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso added a comment. The results are accessible trough the `index.html` in each folder: F7303310: results.rar @aaron.ballman a friendly reminder. https://reviews.llvm.org/D45050 ___ cfe-commits mailing list

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 167597. Charusso marked 37 inline comments as done. Charusso edited the summary of this revision. Charusso added a comment. Thanks for the very in-depth review @aaron.ballman! I have not found a way to obtain the instance of Preprocessor nicely, but it is w

[PATCH] D45050: [clang-tidy] New checker for not null-terminated result caused by strlen(), size() or equal length

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/bugprone/NotNullTerminatedResultCheck.cpp:1038 + + SmallString<128> NewAddNullTermExprStr; + NewAddNullTermExprStr = "\n"; aaron.ballman wrote: > JonasToth wrote: > > whisperity wrote: > > > aaron.ballman w

[PATCH] D58367: [analyzer] NFC: Improve upon the concept of BugReporterVisitor.

Charusso requested changes to this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed. First of all, thanks you for working on this, as I wanted to do the same, but I did not know how to. I did not know also that 15 of the checkers already implements `BugReporterVi

[PATCH] D58368: [analyzer] MIGChecker: Implement bug reporter visitors.

Charusso added a reviewer: Charusso. Charusso requested changes to this revision. Charusso added inline comments. This revision now requires changes to proceed. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MIGChecker.cpp:113 + }); + C.addTransition(C.getState()->set(true), T);

[PATCH] D53076: [analyzer] Enhance ConditionBRVisitor to write out more information

Charusso added a comment. In D53076#1403436 , @NoQ wrote: > I'll take a closer look in a few days, sorry for the delays! The progress > you're making is fantastic and i really appreciate your work, but i have an > urgent piece of work of my own to deal w

[PATCH] D58368: [analyzer] MIGChecker: Implement bug reporter visitors.

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MIGChecker.cpp:47 REGISTER_TRAIT_WITH_PROGRAMSTATE(ReleasedParameter, bool); `;` is not necessary. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58368/new/ https://revie

[PATCH] D58367: [analyzer] NFC: Improve upon the concept of BugReporterVisitor.

Charusso added a comment. In general I think it would be cool to think all of the problems in the same time as these really depends on the `CoreEngine` and how we operates with `ExplodedNodes`. In D58367#1405185 , @NoQ wrote: > In particular, the implem

[PATCH] D58368: [analyzer] MIGChecker: Implement bug reporter visitors.

Charusso added a comment. In D58368#1406490 , @NoQ wrote: > Address comments. > > @Charusso: I agreed not to rush for D58367 > and implemented an old-style visitor here instead :) Thanks you! I wanted to accept it when

[PATCH] D50488: [Analyzer] Checker for non-determinism caused by sorting of pointer-like elements

Charusso added a comment. bitcoin: sudo apt-get install build-essential libtool autotools-dev automake pkg-config libssl-dev libevent-dev bsdmainutils python3 libboost-all-dev software-properties-common libminiupnpc-dev libzmq3-dev libqt5gui5 libqt5core5a libqt5dbus5 qttools5-dev qttools5-de

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso added a comment. Sorry for that much rewrite request but in a script language you have to name your stuff properly or you will be completely lost. I have not written a single Python class yet, but trust me. I really like that `DotDumpVisitor` semantic, but it would be a lot better at

[PATCH] D62658: [analyzer] print() JSONify: ExplodedNode revision

Charusso created this revision. Charusso added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, ravikandhadai, baloghadamsoftware, Szelethus. Charusso added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet. Revert node-ID removal. Repository:

[PATCH] D62716: [analyzer] Fix JSON dumps for dynamic types, add test.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Not sure why I was blind here, thanks you! Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62716/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62716

[PATCH] D62658: [analyzer] print() JSONify: ExplodedNode revision

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL362249: [analyzer] print() JSONify: ExplodedNode revision (authored by Charusso, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://r

[PATCH] D62754: [analyzer] Fix JSON dumps for location contexts.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. That was my feeling as well, but it has been defined like that. Thanks for the clarification! Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62754/new/ htt

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/utils/analyzer/exploded-graph-rewriter.py:151 +super(ExplodedGraph, self).__init__() +self.nodes = collections.defaultdict(ExplodedNode) +self.root_id = None NoQ wrote: > Charusso wrote: >

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso added a comment. In D62638#1525823 , @NoQ wrote: > Also switched to python2 because it seems to be the default. The differences > are minimal. What about the state of the patch itself? Planned stuff WIP, could I take it to SVGify, or? CHANGE

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/utils/analyzer/exploded-graph-rewriter.py:191 +.replace('\\>', '>') \ +.rstrip(',') +logging.debug(raw_json) NoQ wrote: > Charusso wr

[PATCH] D62761: [analyzer] exploded-graph-rewriter: Implement a --diff mode.

Charusso added a comment. In D62761#1525917 , @NoQ wrote: > Remove "-" from program point dumps because it resembles a removal marker in > diffs. Could you add an image? I have not seen any problematic stuff, just that. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION htt

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Let us see those tests! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62638/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62638 ___ cfe-commits mai

[PATCH] D62638: [analyzer] A Python script to prettify the ExplodedGraph dumps.

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: cfe/trunk/utils/analyzer/exploded-graph-rewriter.py:1 +#!/usr/bin/env python + ``` # something else then # #==- exploded-graph-rewriter.py - Simplifies the ExplodedGraph -*- python -*-==# # # Part of the LLVM Project, u

[PATCH] D60670: [analyzer] [NFC] PathDiagnostic: Create PathDiagnosticPopUpPiece

Charusso added a comment. Fix a nit in rL362632 . Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60670/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60670 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@l

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso created this revision. Charusso added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, ravikandhadai, baloghadamsoftware, Szelethus. Charusso added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet. When we traversed backwards on Explode

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:835-842 // First, find when we processed the statement. do { if (auto CEE = Node->getLocationAs()) if (CEE->getCalleeContext()->getCallSite() == S)

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 203324. Charusso marked 4 inline comments as done. Charusso retitled this revision from "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls" to "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls". Charusso added a comme

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 203326. Charusso added a comment. - Better wording. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp clang/test/Analysis/new-ctor-null-throw.c

[PATCH] D62946: [analyzer] ProgramPoint: more explicit printJson()

Charusso created this revision. Charusso added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, ravikandhadai, baloghadamsoftware, Szelethus. Charusso added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet. Now we print out every possible kinds

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso marked an inline comment as done. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:835-842 // First, find when we processed the statement. do { if (auto CEE = Node->getLocationAs()) if (CEE->getCa

[PATCH] D62978: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle non-null ReturnStmts

Charusso created this revision. Charusso added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, ravikandhadai, baloghadamsoftware, Szelethus. Charusso added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet. Charusso added a comment. Suppressed e

[PATCH] D62978: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle non-null ReturnStmts

Charusso added a comment. Suppressed example: F9091784: return-non-null.html Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62978/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62978 ___ cfe-commi

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso added a comment. If I run `scan-build` on LLVM this is the only non-bypassed case since the first diff: F9091851: non-bypassed.html I think it is working well. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.or

[PATCH] D62946: [analyzer] ProgramPoint: more explicit printJson()

Charusso added a comment. In D62946#1533592 , @NoQ wrote: > Fair enough! > > Tests are welcome. Is it possible? E.g. I have not found any case for `PostCondition` and may it requires 10+ of dot dumps which is very space-consuming. I think test to print

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 203635. Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. - Added `CallExpr` as being purged away - More test CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnal

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls

Charusso added a comment. In D62926#1533560 , @NoQ wrote: > I'd like to have a test in which the constructor is //inlined//. What do you mean by that test? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D6292

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 203874. Charusso retitled this revision from "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass constructing objects to see inlined calls" to "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls". Charusso added a comment. - The most generic approach. CHANGES

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:842-849 + if (Optional CEE = Node->getLocationAs()) if (CEE->getCalleeContext()->getCallSite() == S) break; -

[PATCH] D62978: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle unknown ReturnStmts better

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 203876. Charusso retitled this revision from "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle non-null ReturnStmts" to "[analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle unknown ReturnStmts better". Charusso edited the summary of this revision. Charusso added a comment. - The report was to

[PATCH] D62978: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Handle unknown ReturnStmts better

Charusso added a comment. In D62978#1533558 , @NoQ wrote: > Ah, that positive! Positive == true positive, not false positive, I got it. > No, i don't think this is a valid way to suppress it. Bought me, they are worth to report. The misleading reports

[PATCH] D63093: [analyzer] WIP: MallocChecker: Release temporary CXXNewExpr

Charusso created this revision. Charusso added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, ravikandhadai, baloghadamsoftware, Szelethus. Charusso added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, rnkovacs, szepet. - Repository: rC Clang https://re

[PATCH] D63093: [analyzer] WIP: MallocChecker: Release temporary CXXNewExpr

Charusso planned changes to this revision. Charusso added a comment. This is heavily WIP as sometimes we have to release a `new` after we return it or a constructor did something with that. The direction is okay? Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D6309

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:842-849 + if (Optional CEE = Node->getLocationAs()) if (CEE->getCalleeContext()->getCallSite() == S) break; -

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 204111. Charusso marked an inline comment as done. Charusso added a comment. - I have used `LocationContext::isParentOf()`which is not worked well, so I thought we are out of our context. - With that I made some misleading assumptions about our code. CHANG

[PATCH] D62978: [analyzer] trackExpressionValue(): Handle unknown values better

Charusso marked 8 inline comments as done. Charusso added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/diagnostics/deref-track-symbolic-region.c:14 int m = 0; - syz.x = foo(); // expected-note{{Value assigned to 'syz.x'}} Here. Commen

[PATCH] D62761: [analyzer] exploded-graph-rewriter: Implement a --diff mode.

Charusso accepted this revision. Charusso added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. I asked for the new behavior, but I think it should be cool. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62761/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62761 __

[PATCH] D62761: [analyzer] exploded-graph-rewriter: Implement a --diff mode.

Charusso added a comment. In D62761#1539143 , @NoQ wrote: > In D62761#1539137 , @Charusso wrote: > > > I asked for the new behavior, but I think it should be cool. > > > The new behavior is on the original screensho

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 204331. Charusso marked an inline comment as done. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp clang/test/Analysis/inlining/placement-new-f

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso added a comment. In D62926#1539191 , @NoQ wrote: > All right, it seems that i'm completely misunderstanding this problem and > we've been talking past each other this whole time. > > The problem is not that we need to skip the `CXXConstructExpr`.

[PATCH] D62946: [analyzer] ProgramPoint: more explicit printJson()

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL363187: [analyzer] ProgramPoint: more explicit printJson() (authored by Charusso, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 204625. Charusso marked 3 inline comments as done. Charusso added a comment. - Fixed comments. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp

[PATCH] D62926: [analyzer] ReturnVisitor: Bypass everything to see inlined calls

Charusso updated this revision to Diff 204698. Charusso marked an inline comment as done. Charusso added a comment. - Whoops. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp clang/

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >