[clang] [analyzer] Splitting TaintPropagation checker into reporting and mode… (PR #98157)

[Donát Nagy via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -1122,10 +1131,20 @@ void GenericTaintChecker::taintUnsafeSocketProtocol(const CallEvent &Call,
 }
 
 /// Checker registration
-void ento::registerGenericTaintChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
+void ento::registerTaintPropagationChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
   Mgr.registerChecker<GenericTaintChecker>();
 }
 
+bool ento::shouldRegisterTaintPropagationChecker(const CheckerManager &mgr) {
+  return true;
+}
+
+void ento::registerGenericTaintChecker(CheckerManager &Mgr) {
+  GenericTaintChecker *checker = Mgr.getChecker<GenericTaintChecker>();
+  checker->isTaintReporterCheckerEnabled = true;
+  checker->reporterCheckerName = Mgr.getCurrentCheckerName();
----------------
NagyDonat wrote:

Because this way we can access the checker name specified in `Checkers.td` via the function `Mgr.getCurrentCheckerName();`.

When the checker class corresponds to just one checker defined in `Checkers.td` we can use the alternative constructor of `BugType` that takes the checker object (`this`) as a first argument and then queries the name from the checker object (which can save a _single_ name automatically).

When a single class implements multiple checkers, we need to explicitly pass the right name to the `BugType` constructor, and so we need to either (1) postpone the construction of the `BugType` to a point after the registration or (2) duplicate the checker name between `Checkers.td` and the source file.

AFAIK we always choose option (1), but I didn't check this systematically.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98157