[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

Now, the cfg for this example:

  void test_for_implicit_scope() {
for (A a; A b = a;)
  A c;
  }

looks like this:
F5874197: CFG-implicit-for.dot 


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 137150.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Rebased and updated. Fix the issue with ordering between ScopeEnds and implicit 
destructors.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1171 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return [B1.1];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.3], class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.5], class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.3], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.6], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.8], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.13], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B1.2], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B3.3], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B3.5], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: UV
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B3.6] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, _Bool)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   T: if [B3.7]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (2): B2 B1
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B1 B2
+void test_return() {
+  A a;
+  A b;
+  if (UV) return;
+  A c;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B5 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B4
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: [B4.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: CFGScopeEnd(b)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B4.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B2 B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, [B2.3], class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#1001466, @NoQ wrote:

> I poked Devin offline and we agreed that the overall approach is good to go. 
> Maxim, thank you for picking it up!
>
> We still don't have scopes for segments of code that don't have any variables 
> in them, so i guess it's not yet in the shape where it is super useful for 
> loops, but it's already useful for finding use of stale stack variables, 
> which was the whole point originally, so i think this should definitely land 
> soon.
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#993512, @m.ostapenko wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#992452, @NoQ wrote:
> >
> > > Am i understanding correctly that while destroying `a` you can still use 
> > > the storage of `b` safely? Or should `a` go out of scope before `b` gets 
> > > destroyed?
> >
> >
> > AFAIU, when we destroying `a` we can still use the storage of `b` because 
> > nothing can be allocated into b's storage between calling destructors for 
> > `b` and `a`. So, imho the sequence should look like:
> >
> >   [B4.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
> >   [B5.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
> >   CFGScopeEnd(b)
> >   CFGScopeEnd(a)
> >  
> >
>
>
> Thought about it a bit more and this still doesn't look correct to me. Like, 
> `a.~A()` is a function call. It can do a lot of unexpected stuff to registers 
> and stack space before jumping into the function. And given that `a` and `b` 
> are in different scopes (`a` is in loop scope, `b` is in single iteration 
> scope), storage of `b` is not protected from such stuff during call to the 
> destructor of `a`. So there's definitely something fishy here. I guess scope 
> ends and destructors would have to be properly interleaved in all cases of 
> exiting multiple scopes.


Sounds reasonable, I'll fix this.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#1011218, @NoQ wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#1010096, @szepet wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#992454, @NoQ wrote:
> >
> > > @szepet: so i see that `LoopExit` goes in the beginning of the cleanup 
> > > block after the loop, while various `ScopeEnd`s go after the `LoopExit`. 
> > > Would loop unrolling be significantly broken if you simply subscribe to 
> > > `ScopeEnd` instead of `LoopExit` and avoid cleaning up the loop state 
> > > until destructors are processed? I might not be remembering correctly - 
> > > is `LoopExit` only used for cleanup, or do we have more work to be done 
> > > here?
> >
> >
> > I guess your following comment just answers this:
> >
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#1001466, @NoQ wrote:
> >
> > > We still don't have scopes for segments of code that don't have any 
> > > variables in them, so i guess it's not yet in the shape where it is super 
> > > useful for loops, but it's already useful for finding use of stale stack 
> > > variables, which was the whole point originally, so i think this should 
> > > definitely land soon.
> >
> >
> > It could be, however, we would lose cases like:
> >
> >   int i = 0;
> >   int a[32];
> >   for(i = 0;i<32;++i) {a[i] = i;}
> >
> >
> > Since there is no variable which has the scope of the loop, ScopeEnd would 
> > be not enough. Sure, we could remove this case, however, the aim is to 
> > extend the loop-patterns for completely unrolling. Another thing that there 
> > are the patches which would enhance the covered cases by LoopExit 
> > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D39398) and add the LoopEntrance to the 
> > CFG(https://reviews.llvm.org/D41150) as well. So, at this point, I feel 
> > like it would be a huge step back not to use these elements. (Sorry Maxim 
> > that we are discussing this here^^)
>
>
> Yeah, i mean, like, if we change the scope markers to also appear even when 
> no variables are present in the scope, then it would be possible to replace 
> loop markers with some of the scope markers, right?


Hm, so does this mean that I need to cover the case when no variables are 
present in loop scope here in this patch?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 132393.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Fix scope ends order (as discussed above) and adjust a testcase.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1168 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return [B1.1];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: UV
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B3.6] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, _Bool)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   T: if [B3.7]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (2): B2 B1
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B1 B2
+void test_return() {
+  A a;
+  A b;
+  if (UV) return;
+  A c;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B5 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B4
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: [B4.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: CFGScopeEnd(b)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B4.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B2 B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B2.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#992452, @NoQ wrote:

> Thank you, this explanation looks very reasonable.
>
> All right, so right after the termination of the loop we have
>
>   [B1]
>   1: ForStmt (LoopExit)
>   2: [B4.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
>   3: [B5.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
>   4: CFGScopeEnd(a)
>   5: CFGScopeEnd(b)
>
>
> ... where `[B4.5]` is `A b = a;` and `[B5.3]` is `A a;`. Am i understanding 
> correctly that while destroying `a` you can still use the storage of `b` 
> safely? Or should `a` go out of scope before `b` gets destroyed?


AFAIU, when we destroying `a` we can still use the storage of `b` because 
nothing can be allocated into b's storage between calling destructors for `b` 
and `a`. So, imho the sequence should look like:

  [B4.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
  [B5.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
  CFGScopeEnd(b)
  CFGScopeEnd(a)



> Also, is the order of scope ends actually correct here - shouldn't `b` go out 
> of scope earlier? Given that they are in very different lifetime scopes (`a` 
> is one for the whole loop, `b` is per-loop-iteration). I guess the order 
> would matter for the analyzer.

Yeah, this is a bug in a current implementation. Will fix this in the next 
patch version.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

Actually upload the files.
F5792949: CFG-scopes-destructors-loopexit.dot 


F5792948: CFG-scopes-loopexit-lifetime.dot 


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

Hi Artem,

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#989451, @NoQ wrote:

> Hmm. @m.ostapenko @szepet @mgehre - I think it might be a good time to figure 
> out if `ScopeBegin`/`ScopeEnd`, `LoopEntrance`/`LoopExit`, `LifetimeEnds`, 
> `AutomaticObjectDtor` elements work nicely together. How should they be 
> ordered with respect to each other?


Here are several observations about `ScopeBegin`/`ScopeEnd`, 
`LoopEntrance`/`LoopExit`, `LifetimeEnds`, `AutomaticObjectDtor` interaction:

1. `LifetimeEnds` and  `AutomaticObjectDtor` don't work together (I'm unable to 
tell why).
2. The difference between `ScopeBegin`/`ScopeEnd` and  `LifetimeEnds` was 
described by Devin several comments above, in short:
  - `LifetimeEnds` emits markers for when the lifetime of a C++ object in an 
automatic variable ends. For C++ objects with non-trivial destructors, this 
point is when the destructor is called. At this point the storage for the 
variable still exists, but what you can do with that storage is very restricted 
by the language because its contents have been destroyed.
  - `ScopeBegin`/`ScopeEnd` add markers for when the storage duration for the 
variable begins and ends. Hence I can conclude that `ScopeEnd` should reside 
after implicit destructors and `LifetimeEnds` markers in CFG.
3. `LoopEntrance`/`LoopExit` improve modelling of unrolled loops and I'm not 
sure whether scopes across iterations are the only thing that's modeled here.

> Is any of these scope representation a superset of another scope 
> representation, or maybe fully covered by other two or three other scope 
> representations?

Given my observations above, I'm not sure whether some representation can be 
fully covered by others -- all of them serve different purposes. Or perhaps I'm 
missing something?

> Would anybody be willing to produce some pictures (`-analyzer-checker 
> debug.ViewCFG` and attach here) with current and/or intended behavior?

I'm attaching two CFGs for the following example:

  void test_for_implicit_scope() {
for (A a; A b = a; )
  A c;
  }

  $ ./bin/clang -cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze 
-analyzer-checker=debug.ViewCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true 
-analyzer-config cfg-loopexit=true -analyzer-config unroll-loops=true 
/tmp/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
  -> CFG-scopes-destructors-loopexit.dot
  
  $ ./bin/clang -cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze 
-analyzer-checker=debug.ViewCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true 
-analyzer-config cfg-loopexit=true -analyzer-config cfg-lifetime=true 
-analyzer-config cfg-implicit-dtors=false /tmp/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
  -> CFG-scopes-loopexit-lifetime.dot{F5792940}
  
  {F5792939}



> Not sure, i guess `LifetimeEnds` is mostly used in `clang-tidy` so it does 
> not necessarily need to work together with analyzer-specific elements (or 
> maybe it's so great that we should switch to using it), but it would still be 
> great if we had a single scope representation which would be rich enough to 
> satisfy all needs.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 131091.
m.ostapenko added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.

Rebased and ping.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1171 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return [B1.1];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: UV
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B3.6] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, _Bool)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   T: if [B3.7]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (2): B2 B1
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B1 B2
+void test_return() {
+  A a;
+  A b;
+  if (UV) return;
+  A c;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B5 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B4
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeEnd(b)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: [B4.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B4.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B2 B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B2.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT: 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 130183.
m.ostapenko retitled this revision from "Add scope information to CFG for 
If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements" to "Add scope information to 
CFG".
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Some code cleanup + updated test case.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1171 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return [B1.1];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: UV
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B3.6] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, _Bool)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   T: if [B3.7]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (2): B2 B1
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B1 B2
+void test_return() {
+  A a;
+  A b;
+  if (UV) return;
+  A c;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B5 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B4
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeEnd(b)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: [B4.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: CFGScopeEnd(a)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B4.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (2): B2 B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(c)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B2.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 129985.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Hi Devin,

now I'm very sorry for a such long delay. Now I have a bunch of time to proceed 
development of this patch (if scope contexts are still needed, of course).
Regarding to approach you suggested (reuse LocalScope infrastructure and use 
first VarDecl for ScopeBegin): it seems very reasonable for me, but perhaps I 
need more advisory here.
I've implemented a draft patch to make sure I've understood you correctly (this 
is not a final version, the test case is completely inadequate for now). While 
testing, I've discovered several questions that I would like to discuss:

1. Do we need to have one-to-one mapping between ScopeBegins and corresponding 
ScopeEnds or is it OK to assume that ScopeEnd can terminate several nested 
scopes?
2. In the following example:

  class A {
  public:
A() {}
~A() {}
operator int() const { return 1; }
  };
  
  bool UV;
  void test_for_implicit_scope() {
for (A a; A b = a; )
if (UV) continue;
A c;
}

  it seems that lifetime of **b** ends when we branch out from the loop body 
(if entered, of course), but it seems that in current implementation we don't 
generate an implicit destructor for **b** just before **continue**. Is this a 
bug, or perhaps I'm missing something?
  # The approach with first VarDecl works not so well with the following test 
case:

  void test_goto() {
A f;
  l0:
A d;
{ 
  A a;
  if (UV) goto l0;
  if (UV) goto l1;
  A b;
}
  l1:
A c;
  }

in this approach we'll don't emit a ScopeBegin for **d** because the first 
VarDecl is **f**. However IMHO we still need to add ScopeBegin for **d** in 
order to handle d's scope end occurring when we jumping to //l0// via **if (UV) 
goto l0;**. I think this can be solved by adding ScopeBegin for **d** when 
backpatching blocks late in **buildCFG** routine (when we know all targets of 
all gotos). Does this approach look reasonable for you?

Thanks.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,909 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B3 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B2
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   10: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   11: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK:   13: A b;
+// CHECK:   14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK:   15: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK:   16: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 112547.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Ping^4


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1098 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 111322.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Ping^3


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1098 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 110329.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Rebased and ping.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathDiagnostic.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1098 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 108644.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Updated some comments. Could someone take a look please?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1099 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.12].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B3]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 107894.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Rebased and removed a bunch of stale changes. Also added a check for goto's: if 
we see GotoStmt and have cfg-scopes == true, make badCFG = true and retry 
without scopes enabled. This check will be removed once GotoStmt will become 
supported.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1099 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.12].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#808104, @NoQ wrote:

> I think the remaining switch-related code seems to be about C++17 switch 
> condition variables, i.e. `switch (int x = ...)`(?)


Yeah, exactly. I can remove it from this patch if it looks confusing.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 106408.
m.ostapenko retitled this revision from "Add scope information to CFG" to "Add 
scope information to CFG for If/While/For/Do/Compound/CXXRangeFor statements".
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Updating the diff. I've dropped SwitchStmt support, let's implement in 
separately as well as GotoStmt.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1030 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: A b;
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.12].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  15: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  16: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B4 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B3
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(IfStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: return;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: [B3.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B3.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// 

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

Hi Artem, I'm sorry for a long delay (nasty corporate issues).

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#789957, @NoQ wrote:

> Maxim, totally thanks for picking this up!
>
> Could you explain the idea behind `shouldDeferScopeEnd`, maybe in a code 
> comment before the function?
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403#788926, @m.ostapenko wrote:
>
> > Current patch should support basic {If, While, For, Compound, Switch}Stmts 
> > as well as their interactions with {Break, Continue, Return}Stmts.
> >  GotoStmt and CXXForRangeStmt are not supported at this moment.
>
>
> `SwitchStmt` isn't much easier than `GotoStmt`; it doesn't jump backwards, 
> but it can still jump into multiple different scopes. Does your code handle 
> Duff's device (1)  (2) 
>  correctly? We should probably 
> add it as a test, or split out switch support into a separate patch together 
> with goto, if such test isn't yet supported.


Ugh, yeah, SwitchStmt is tricky (thank you for pointing to Duff's device 
example!). I've tried to resolve several issues with switch revealed by this 
testcase, but didn't succeed for now :(. So, it was decided to remove 
SwitchStmt support in this patch.
There is one more thing I'd like to clarify: since e.g. BreakStmt can terminate 
multiple scopes, do I need to create ScopeEnd marks for all of them to make 
analyzer's work easier? Because right now only one "cumulative" block is 
generated and I'm not sure that it's acceptable for analyzer.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D16403: Add scope information to CFG

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 103719.
m.ostapenko set the repository for this revision to rL LLVM.
m.ostapenko added a project: clang.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

So, updating the diff. This is still a very experimental version and any 
feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Current patch should support basic {If, While, For, Compound, Switch}Stmts as 
well as their interactions with {Break, Continue, Return}Stmts.
GotoStmt and CXXForRangeStmt are not supported at this moment.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D16403

Files:
  include/clang/Analysis/AnalysisContext.h
  include/clang/Analysis/CFG.h
  include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h
  lib/Analysis/AnalysisDeclContext.cpp
  lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalysisManager.cpp
  lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.c
  test/Analysis/analyzer-config.cpp
  test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp

Index: test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/Analysis/scopes-cfg-output.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,1468 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-scopes=true %s > %t 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
+
+class A {
+public:
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B1 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+  ~A() {}
+
+// CHECK:  [B3 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: 1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: return [B1.2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B3
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B2
+// CHECK:  [B2]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeEnd(ReturnStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+  operator int() const { return 1; }
+};
+
+int getX();
+extern const bool UV;
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: a
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B1.4] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: const A  = a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: A() (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: [B1.7] (BindTemporary)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: [B1.8] (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  10: [B1.9]
+// CHECK-NEXT:  11: const A  = A();
+// CHECK-NEXT:  12: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  13: [B1.11].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:  14: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+void test_const_ref() {
+  A a;
+  const A& b = a;
+  const A& c = A();
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [2])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a[2];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A [0])
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: A b[0];
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_array() {
+  A a[2];
+  A b[0];
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B2 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B1
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: A a;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: CFGScopeBegin(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   7:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   8: A d;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   9: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   10: [B1.8].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   11: [B1.6].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   12:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK:   13: A b;
+// CHECK:   14: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK:   15: [B1.13].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK:   16: [B1.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B2
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  [B0 (EXIT)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B1
+void test_scope() {
+  A a;
+  { A c;
+A d;
+  }
+  A b;
+}
+
+// CHECK:  [B5 (ENTRY)]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B4
+// CHECK:  [B1]
+// CHECK-NEXT:   1:  (CXXConstructExpr, class A)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   2: A c;
+// CHECK-NEXT:   3: CFGScopeEnd(CompoundStmt)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   4: [B1.2].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   5: [B4.5].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   6: [B4.3].~A() (Implicit destructor)
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Preds (1): B4
+// CHECK-NEXT:   Succs (1): B0
+// CHECK:  

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210#780520, @fjricci wrote:

> Currently, the way that we tell users to gate on sanitizer-specific behavior 
> is with `__has_feature(foo_sanitizer)`, as far as I know, it's the only way 
> to do so. LSan provides several API functions for users, ie 
> `__lsan_ignore_object`. If a user program wants to use these API functions in 
> their program, they need a way to check that LSan is enabled at compilation 
> time (even if LSan doesn't actually modify the compile step). I'm not sure of 
> a better or more consistent way to allow that to happen.


Can't you use weak hooks in your code for this purpose?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D33941: [Driver] Add test to cover case when LSan is not supported

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko created this revision.

This commit adds a testcase for uncovered code paths in LSan options parsing 
logic in driver.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D33941

Files:
  test/Driver/fsanitize.c


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -271,6 +271,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target thumbeb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target mips-unknown-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-MIPS
+// CHECK-SANL-MIPS: unsupported option '-fsanitize=leak' for target 
'mips-unknown-linux'
+
+// RUN: %clang -target powerpc-unknown-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-PPC
+// CHECK-SANL-PPC: unsupported option '-fsanitize=leak' for target 
'powerpc-unknown-linux'
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -271,6 +271,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target thumbeb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target mips-unknown-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-MIPS
+// CHECK-SANL-MIPS: unsupported option '-fsanitize=leak' for target 'mips-unknown-linux'
+
+// RUN: %clang -target powerpc-unknown-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-PPC
+// CHECK-SANL-PPC: unsupported option '-fsanitize=leak' for target 'powerpc-unknown-linux'
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D31760: [lsan] Enable LSan on arm Linux, clang part

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 94708.
m.ostapenko added a project: Sanitizers.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Add armeb and thumbeb for completeness.
Just curious, does anyone use sanitizers in these targets? I see no public 
buildbots for armeb and thumbeb. Anyway, not a big deal of course.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D31760

Files:
  lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
  test/Driver/fsanitize.c


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -237,6 +237,30 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANL-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target armeb-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARMEB
+// CHECK-SANL-ARMEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target armeb-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARMEB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARMEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumbeb-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-THUMBEB
+// CHECK-SANL-THUMBEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumbeb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMBEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
@@ -864,14 +864,17 @@
getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::ppc64le;
   const bool IsAArch64 = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64 ||
  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64_be;
+  const bool IsArmArch = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::arm ||
+ llvm::Triple::thumb || llvm::Triple::armeb ||
+ llvm::Triple::thumbeb;
   SanitizerMask Res = ToolChain::getSupportedSanitizers();
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Address;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::KernelAddress;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Vptr;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86 || IsArmArch)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -237,6 +237,30 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANL-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target armeb-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARMEB
+// CHECK-SANL-ARMEB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: 

[PATCH] D31760: [lsan] Enable LSan on arm Linux, clang part

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 94489.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Also check for thumb.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D31760

Files:
  lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
  test/Driver/fsanitize.c


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -237,6 +237,18 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANL-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
@@ -864,14 +864,16 @@
getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::ppc64le;
   const bool IsAArch64 = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64 ||
  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64_be;
+  const bool IsArmArch =
+  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::arm || llvm::Triple::thumb;
   SanitizerMask Res = ToolChain::getSupportedSanitizers();
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Address;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::KernelAddress;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Vptr;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86 || IsArmArch)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -237,6 +237,18 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANL-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target thumb-linux -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-THUMB: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
@@ -864,14 +864,16 @@
getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::ppc64le;
   const bool IsAArch64 = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64 ||
  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64_be;
+  const bool IsArmArch =
+  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::arm || llvm::Triple::thumb;
   SanitizerMask Res = ToolChain::getSupportedSanitizers();
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Address;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::KernelAddress;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Vptr;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86 || IsArmArch)
 Res |= 

[PATCH] D31760: [lsan] Enable LSan on arm Linux, clang part

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko created this revision.
Herald added subscribers: rengolin, aemerson.

This is a compiler part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D29586. Enable LSan on arm 
Linux.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D31760

Files:
  lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
  test/Driver/fsanitize.c


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -234,6 +234,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-X86
 // CHECK-SANL-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
@@ -864,14 +864,15 @@
getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::ppc64le;
   const bool IsAArch64 = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64 ||
  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64_be;
+  const bool IsArmArch = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::arm;
   SanitizerMask Res = ToolChain::getSupportedSanitizers();
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Address;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::KernelAddress;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Vptr;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86 || IsArmArch)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -234,6 +234,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-X86
 // CHECK-SANL-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-ARM
+// CHECK-SANL-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target arm-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-ARM: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains/Linux.cpp
@@ -864,14 +864,15 @@
getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::ppc64le;
   const bool IsAArch64 = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64 ||
  getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::aarch64_be;
+  const bool IsArmArch = getTriple().getArch() == llvm::Triple::arm;
   SanitizerMask Res = ToolChain::getSupportedSanitizers();
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Address;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::KernelAddress;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::Vptr;
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86 || IsArmArch)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D29077: [lsan] Enable LSan for x86 Linux.

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko updated this revision to Diff 85756.
m.ostapenko added a comment.

Add a test case.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D29077

Files:
  lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
  test/Driver/fsanitize.c


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -231,6 +231,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck 
%s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-X86
+// CHECK-SANL-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak 
-fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s 
--check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | 
FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
@@ -4730,7 +4730,7 @@
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;


Index: test/Driver/fsanitize.c
===
--- test/Driver/fsanitize.c
+++ test/Driver/fsanitize.c
@@ -231,6 +231,12 @@
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA
 // CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA: "-fsanitize=leak"
 
+// RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=leak %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANL-X86
+// CHECK-SANL-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
+// RUN: %clang -target i686-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address,leak -fno-sanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86
+// CHECK-SANA-SANL-NO-SANA-X86: "-fsanitize=leak"
+
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=memory %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MSAN
 // CHECK-MSAN: "-fno-assume-sane-operator-new"
 // RUN: %clang -target x86_64-linux-gnu -fsanitize=address %s -### 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ASAN
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
@@ -4730,7 +4730,7 @@
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D29077: [lsan] Enable LSan for x86 Linux.

[Maxim Ostapenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

m.ostapenko created this revision.
m.ostapenko added a project: Sanitizers.

This is a missed part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D28609. Enable LSan for x86 
Linux in clang driver.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D29077

Files:
  lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp


Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
@@ -4730,7 +4730,7 @@
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;


Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
===
--- lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
+++ lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp
@@ -4730,7 +4730,7 @@
   Res |= SanitizerKind::SafeStack;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::DataFlow;
-  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64)
+  if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsX86)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Leak;
   if (IsX86_64 || IsMIPS64 || IsAArch64 || IsPowerPC64)
 Res |= SanitizerKind::Thread;
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits