This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL320455: [analyzer] StackAddrEscape: For now, disable the new
async escape checks. (authored by dergachev).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41042?vs=126390=126496#toc
Repository:
NoQ updated this revision to Diff 126390.
NoQ added a comment.
Add a FIXME test.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41042
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Checkers.td
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StackAddrEscapeChecker.cpp
test/Analysis/stack-capture-leak-arc.mm
NoQ added a comment.
Yeah, we usually try to avoid omissions of modeling in on-by-default checkers
because the user may accidentally run into projects in which the unmodeled
idiom is common, and then he'd get false positives all over the place. In my
case it was just two new positives, both
alexshap accepted this revision.
alexshap added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
i see, to be honest, this is kind of unfortunate, if i am not mistaken, i've
seen these false-positives, but not too many, most reports were real bugs. But
if it's annoying, than i think
NoQ updated this revision to Diff 126247.
NoQ added a comment.
Update the other run-line.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41042
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Checkers.td
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StackAddrEscapeChecker.cpp
test/Analysis/stack-capture-leak-arc.mm
NoQ created this revision.
Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, a.sidorin, szepet, xazax.hun.
I'm seeing false positives on the new check added in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39438 of the following kind:
void foo() {
T buf[16];
for ( int n = 0; n < 16; ++n) {
T *ptr = [n];
