r249721 - When mapping no_sanitize_* attributes to no_sanitize attributes, handle GNU-style formatting that involves prefix and suffix underscores. Cleans up other usages of similar functionality.
Richard Smith via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Oct 8 15:10:25 PDT 2015
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Adrian Zgorzalek <adek at fb.com> wrote:
> Same story:
> warning: 'ownership_takes' attribute only applies to functions
> [-Wignored-attributes]
> __attribute__((ownership_takes(__))) void f();
> ^
>
Oh, I see, you're building in C, and the diagnostic here is broken (we give
the "only applies to functions" diagnostic when it's applied to a function
without a prototype). =( Aaron, can I tempt you to fix that? ;)
Try this one:
__attribute__((ownership_takes(__, 1))) void f(void*);
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 2:52 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Adrian Zgorzalek <adek at fb.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 2:17 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Adrian Zgorzalek via cfe-commits <
>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> You are right, my bad, I thought this if covers all the cases, but <foo>
>>> part could be empty.
>>>
>>> Here is the fix
>>>
>>
>> Please add a testcase ("__attribute__((ownership_takes(__))) void f();"
>> maybe?).
>>
>> I tried different attributes but none of them triggers the assert though.
>> They all spit out warning:
>> warning: 'ownership_takes' attribute only applies to functions
>> [-Wignored-attributes]
>> __attribute__((ownership_takes(__))) f();
>> ^
>>
>
> You missed the 'void'.
>
>
>> Do you have some other idea?
>>
>>
>>
>> The '&&' should go at the end of the previous line.
>>
>> Adrian
>>> > On Oct 8, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com
>>> >
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk
>>> >
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits
>>> >>>> <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Author: aaronballman
>>> >>>>> Date: Thu Oct 8 14:24:08 2015
>>> >>>>> New Revision: 249721
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> URL:
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev%3D249721%26view%3Drev&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=8862f3210cdb7661e90a0d8588334d3e1cf64e92851d05bbcd2b159daf05c7dd
>>> >>>>> Log:
>>> >>>>> When mapping no_sanitize_* attributes to no_sanitize attributes,
>>> handle
>>> >>>>> GNU-style formatting that involves prefix and suffix underscores.
>>> >>>>> Cleans up
>>> >>>>> other usages of similar functionality.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Patch by Adrian Zgorzalek!
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Modified:
>>> >>>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
>>> >>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-address.cpp
>>> >>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-memory.cpp
>>> >>>>> cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-thread.cpp
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
>>> >>>>> URL:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp?rev%3D249721%26r1%3D249720%26r2%3D249721%26view%3Ddiff&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=7dae8eb5cffae4493f0a6c26033810564fd7b688297fc93106a3b980f76cdd9f
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> >>>>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp (original)
>>> >>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp Thu Oct 8 14:24:08 2015
>>> >>>>> @@ -1308,6 +1308,17 @@ void Sema::AddAssumeAlignedAttr(SourceRa
>>> >>>>> AssumeAlignedAttr(AttrRange, Context, E, OE,
>>> >>>>> SpellingListIndex));
>>> >>>>> }
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> +/// Normalize the attribute, __foo__ becomes foo.
>>> >>>>> +/// Returns true if normalization was applied.
>>> >>>>> +static bool normalizeName(StringRef &AttrName) {
>>> >>>>> + if (AttrName.startswith("__") && AttrName.endswith("__")) {
>>> >>>>> + assert(AttrName.size() > 4 && "Name too short");
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> This assert will fire on the strings __, ___, and ____, which are
>>> valid
>>> >>>> in
>>> >>>> some of the below cases.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> That assert won't fire on anything but ____ because it's &&, not ||.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> I disagree. __ starts with __ and ends with __. The right thing to do
>>> here
>>> >> is remove the assert and put back the AttrName.size() > 4 check that
>>> the
>>> >> callers used to have.
>>> >
>>> > Hah, you are correct. I hadn't considered that point. I agree with
>>> you. :-)
>>> >
>>> > ~Aaron
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>> I
>>> >>> don't think these names were intended to be valid in their uses.
>>> >>> However, you are correct that this will trigger assertions instead of
>>> >>> diagnostics. Adrian, can you investigate?
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> + AttrName = AttrName.drop_front(2).drop_back(2);
>>> >>>>> + return true;
>>> >>>>> + }
>>> >>>>> + return false;
>>> >>>>> +}
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> static void handleOwnershipAttr(Sema &S, Decl *D, const
>>> AttributeList
>>> >>>>> &AL) {
>>> >>>>> // This attribute must be applied to a function declaration. The
>>> >>>>> first
>>> >>>>> // argument to the attribute must be an identifier, the name of
>>> the
>>> >>>>> resource,
>>> >>>>> @@ -1349,11 +1360,8 @@ static void handleOwnershipAttr(Sema &S,
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> IdentifierInfo *Module = AL.getArgAsIdent(0)->Ident;
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> - // Normalize the argument, __foo__ becomes foo.
>>> >>>>> StringRef ModuleName = Module->getName();
>>> >>>>> - if (ModuleName.startswith("__") && ModuleName.endswith("__") &&
>>> >>>>> - ModuleName.size() > 4) {
>>> >>>>> - ModuleName = ModuleName.drop_front(2).drop_back(2);
>>> >>>>> + if (normalizeName(ModuleName)) {
>>> >>>>> Module = &S.PP.getIdentifierTable().get(ModuleName);
>>> >>>>> }
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> @@ -2648,9 +2656,7 @@ static void handleFormatAttr(Sema &S, De
>>> >>>>> IdentifierInfo *II = Attr.getArgAsIdent(0)->Ident;
>>> >>>>> StringRef Format = II->getName();
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> - // Normalize the argument, __foo__ becomes foo.
>>> >>>>> - if (Format.startswith("__") && Format.endswith("__")) {
>>> >>>>> - Format = Format.substr(2, Format.size() - 4);
>>> >>>>> + if (normalizeName(Format)) {
>>> >>>>> // If we've modified the string name, we need a new identifier
>>> for
>>> >>>>> it.
>>> >>>>> II = &S.Context.Idents.get(Format);
>>> >>>>> }
>>> >>>>> @@ -3131,9 +3137,7 @@ static void handleModeAttr(Sema &S, Decl
>>> >>>>> IdentifierInfo *Name = Attr.getArgAsIdent(0)->Ident;
>>> >>>>> StringRef Str = Name->getName();
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> - // Normalize the attribute name, __foo__ becomes foo.
>>> >>>>> - if (Str.startswith("__") && Str.endswith("__"))
>>> >>>>> - Str = Str.substr(2, Str.size() - 4);
>>> >>>>> + normalizeName(Str);
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> unsigned DestWidth = 0;
>>> >>>>> bool IntegerMode = true;
>>> >>>>> @@ -4533,8 +4537,10 @@ static void handleNoSanitizeAttr(Sema &S
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> static void handleNoSanitizeSpecificAttr(Sema &S, Decl *D,
>>> >>>>> const AttributeList
>>> &Attr) {
>>> >>>>> + StringRef AttrName = Attr.getName()->getName();
>>> >>>>> + normalizeName(AttrName);
>>> >>>>> std::string SanitizerName =
>>> >>>>> - llvm::StringSwitch<std::string>(Attr.getName()->getName())
>>> >>>>> + llvm::StringSwitch<std::string>(AttrName)
>>> >>>>> .Case("no_address_safety_analysis", "address")
>>> >>>>> .Case("no_sanitize_address", "address")
>>> >>>>> .Case("no_sanitize_thread", "thread")
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Is there any way we could use the spelling list index in this case
>>> >>>> rather
>>> >>>> than repeating the attribute names and __-stripping here?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The spelling list index isn't exposed in a meaningful way (and I
>>> think
>>> >>> that would be an abuse of it; I want to someday remove that
>>> >>> implementation detail to something far more private).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I was hoping there would be a way to use the semantic spelling, but
>>> >>> the issue is that this particular attribute doesn't have semantic
>>> >>> spellings. The NoSanitizeSpecificAttr would have one, but it has no
>>> >>> AST node to hang those off of. Since we explicitly document that we
>>> do
>>> >>> not want any additional names added to this list (see Attr.td line
>>> >>> 1500), I think this is a reasonable solution as-is.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ~Aaron
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-address.cpp
>>> >>>>> URL:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-address.cpp?rev%3D249721%26r1%3D249720%26r2%3D249721%26view%3Ddiff&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=46b5171e8784900ffa959a20f8824d63377f6d80d0c92c69d5a271edb5d83930
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> >>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-address.cpp (original)
>>> >>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-address.cpp Thu Oct 8
>>> >>>>> 14:24:08 2015
>>> >>>>> @@ -5,12 +5,14 @@
>>> >>>>> #if !__has_attribute(no_sanitize_address)
>>> >>>>> #error "Should support no_sanitize_address"
>>> >>>>> #endif
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_ADDRESS;
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_address(1)));
>>> // \
>>> >>>>> - // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_address' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_ADDRESS;
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_alt() __attribute__((__no_sanitize_address__));
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_address(1)));
>>> // \
>>> >>>>> + // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_address' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) NO_SANITIZE_ADDRESS;
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) {
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-memory.cpp
>>> >>>>> URL:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-memory.cpp?rev%3D249721%26r1%3D249720%26r2%3D249721%26view%3Ddiff&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=676ca5d3b6bef5b3c04a9d6861c547a35afb54f85454fc23551da843ce369b1c
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> >>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-memory.cpp (original)
>>> >>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-memory.cpp Thu Oct 8
>>> >>>>> 14:24:08
>>> >>>>> 2015
>>> >>>>> @@ -5,12 +5,14 @@
>>> >>>>> #if !__has_attribute(no_sanitize_memory)
>>> >>>>> #error "Should support no_sanitize_memory"
>>> >>>>> #endif
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_MEMORY;
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_memory(1))); //
>>> \
>>> >>>>> - // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_memory' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_MEMORY;
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_alt() __attribute__((__no_sanitize_memory__));
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_memory(1))); //
>>> \
>>> >>>>> + // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_memory' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) NO_SANITIZE_MEMORY;
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) {
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-thread.cpp
>>> >>>>> URL:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-thread.cpp?rev%3D249721%26r1%3D249720%26r2%3D249721%26view%3Ddiff&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=30f400a0be1c699374d1f30504fa1f190158506f984bbeac66fe6998be9fd7b7
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> >>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-thread.cpp (original)
>>> >>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-no-sanitize-thread.cpp Thu Oct 8
>>> >>>>> 14:24:08
>>> >>>>> 2015
>>> >>>>> @@ -5,12 +5,14 @@
>>> >>>>> #if !__has_attribute(no_sanitize_thread)
>>> >>>>> #error "Should support no_sanitize_thread"
>>> >>>>> #endif
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_THREAD;
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> -void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_thread(1))); //
>>> \
>>> >>>>> - // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_thread' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun() NO_SANITIZE_THREAD;
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_alt() __attribute__((__no_sanitize_thread__));
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> +void noanal_fun_args() __attribute__((no_sanitize_thread(1))); //
>>> \
>>> >>>>> + // expected-error {{'no_sanitize_thread' attribute takes no
>>> >>>>> arguments}}
>>> >>>>> +
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) NO_SANITIZE_THREAD;
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> int noanal_testfn(int y) {
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>> cfe-commits mailing list
>>> >>>>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
>>> >>>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=kMsJztGqfQof%2FUicfGEXM78GJV6jd7CTOxlypvgU10A%3D%0A&s=76daddf3012e1755f9df59be7e195c26e1d2179d81b412635ff70771ec3f1ed5
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-commits mailing list
>>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=ZpIyPFH5RmN0EBF%2B6Om2Hg%3D%3D%0A&m=WuZEZVUEJf2wFyWAtrTGXbBNpzW%2BZZw00tc0Mznrgws%3D%0A&s=58e8244698d21f8b1b08bb94af4fa2a7c7767fae61ec85c73e89c56a7de5b422>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20151008/a0901b00/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list