[clang] 5dc9e87 - [analyzer] Improve some comments in ArrayBoundCheckerV2 (NFC) (#83545)
via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Mar 4 01:38:01 PST 2024
Author: NagyDonat
Date: 2024-03-04T10:37:57+01:00
New Revision: 5dc9e87c8cae7842edcaa4dd01308873109208da
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5dc9e87c8cae7842edcaa4dd01308873109208da
DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5dc9e87c8cae7842edcaa4dd01308873109208da.diff
LOG: [analyzer] Improve some comments in ArrayBoundCheckerV2 (NFC) (#83545)
This comment-only change fixes a typo, clarifies some comments and
includes some thoughts about the difficulties in resolving a certain
FIXME.
Added:
Modified:
clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ArrayBoundCheckerV2.cpp
Removed:
################################################################################
diff --git a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ArrayBoundCheckerV2.cpp b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ArrayBoundCheckerV2.cpp
index fdcc46e58580b4..29eb932584027d 100644
--- a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ArrayBoundCheckerV2.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ArrayBoundCheckerV2.cpp
@@ -301,21 +301,27 @@ compareValueToThreshold(ProgramStateRef State, NonLoc Value, NonLoc Threshold,
// calling `evalBinOpNN`:
if (isNegative(SVB, State, Value) && isUnsigned(SVB, Threshold)) {
if (CheckEquality) {
- // negative_value == unsigned_value is always false
+ // negative_value == unsigned_threshold is always false
return {nullptr, State};
}
- // negative_value < unsigned_value is always false
+ // negative_value < unsigned_threshold is always true
return {State, nullptr};
}
if (isUnsigned(SVB, Value) && isNegative(SVB, State, Threshold)) {
- // unsigned_value == negative_value and unsigned_value < negative_value are
- // both always false
+ // unsigned_value == negative_threshold and
+ // unsigned_value < negative_threshold are both always false
return {nullptr, State};
}
- // FIXME: these special cases are sufficient for handling real-world
+ // FIXME: These special cases are sufficient for handling real-world
// comparisons, but in theory there could be contrived situations where
// automatic conversion of a symbolic value (which can be negative and can be
// positive) leads to incorrect results.
+ // NOTE: We NEED to use the `evalBinOpNN` call in the "common" case, because
+ // we want to ensure that assumptions coming from this precondition and
+ // assumptions coming from regular C/C++ operator calls are represented by
+ // constraints on the same symbolic expression. A solution that would
+ // evaluate these "mathematical" compariosns through a separate pathway would
+ // be a step backwards in this sense.
const BinaryOperatorKind OpKind = CheckEquality ? BO_EQ : BO_LT;
auto BelowThreshold =
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list