balazske added a comment.
It is no problem to return instead of the assert. I could fix the problem by
using
SVal LessThanZeroVal = SVB.evalBinOp(State, BO_LE, SizeD, Zero, SizeTy);
in `checkVLAIndexSize` (`BO_LT` is used before). Still the proposed return
makes the code more safe.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:130
+ // constraints are not solved for expressions with multiple
+ // symbols, so just bail on invalid indices at this point.
+ if (IndexL <= 0)
----------------
I do not know if this is accurate reason for the problem, a more general text
is better? And should start with uppercase.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:131
+ // symbols, so just bail on invalid indices at this point.
+ if (IndexL <= 0)
+ return nullptr;
----------------
Can be `==`.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/VLASizeChecker.cpp:134
+
assert(IndexL > 0 && "Index length should have been checked for zero.");
if (KnownSize <= SizeMax / IndexL) {
----------------
The assert does not look good if there is already the check before.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80903/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80903
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
