Charusso marked 2 inline comments as done.
Charusso added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp:842-849
+ if (Optional<CallExitEnd> CEE = Node->getLocationAs<CallExitEnd>())
if (CEE->getCalleeContext()->getCallSite() == S)
break;
- if (auto SP = Node->getLocationAs<StmtPoint>())
- if (SP->getStmt() == S)
- break;
+
+ if (!IsBypass)
+ if (Optional<StmtPoint> SP = Node->getLocationAs<StmtPoint>())
+ if (SP->getStmt() == S)
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Charusso wrote:
> > NoQ wrote:
> > > Comparing statements is usually insufficient because the same statement
> > > may appear multiple times due to recursion. When recursion occurs, you
> > > may reach the same statement in a different location context. You should
> > > think in terms of (statement, location context) pairs to avoid these
> > > problems. Your aim here is to find the `CallExitEnd` node that
> > > corresponds to returning from an inlined operator new to the current
> > > location context. You should stop searching when you find an unrelated
> > > statement in the current location context or when you exit the current
> > > location context entirely.
> > I have made a little test when we have a 25-second long Static Analyzer run
> > with predefined names and checker. The loop ran 500 times in summary and we
> > have some serious performance impacts at other places.
> >
> > We exit the current context to see inlined calls, so that could not work
> > sadly. If you remove that nonsense second condition we run at the same
> > time, so if we have not got any problem since 7 years ago I think it is
> > good to go.
> You should break the loop as soon as we go past the new-expression that we've
> started with in the stack frame that we've started with. That is, you should
> at most go through the constructor within the new-expression, and then break.
> You shouldn't explore the whole graph to the root every time the operator-new
> call isn't inlined.
>
> This might still be slow in some rare cases, but it should be much faster.
Sorry, I was dumb and I have used `isParentOf()` before, I think it is the most
simple approach now truly.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
