[PATCH] D105819: [analyzer] MallocChecker: Add a visitor to leave a note on functions that could have, but did not change ownership on leaked memory

[Kristóf Umann via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

Szelethus added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MallocChecker.cpp:801
+    // must be a superset of, but not necessarily equal to ExitOwners.
+    return !llvm::set_is_subset(ExitOwners, CurrOwners);
+  }
----------------
Szelethus wrote:
> NoQ wrote:
> > Can you also comment on what's, generally, the default scenario / motivating example where this is necessary? What makes you hunt down store bindings that didn't cause an escape to happen (given that an escape would have been a state change)? IIUC this is for the situation when the callee stores the pointer in a caller-local variable and in this case you don't want to claim that ownership didn't change?
> The comment above is meant to explain it. 
>     // [...] Any pointers
>     // inside the call that pointed to the allocated memory are of little
>     // consequence if their lifetime ends before within the function
Oh, speaking of which, that is a gramarr eror.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D105819/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D105819