[clang] [Clang SA]: add support for mismatched ownership_returns+ownership_takes calls for custom allocation classes (PR #98941)

[Balazs Benics via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -1918,26 +1982,54 @@ static bool printMemFnName(raw_ostream &os, CheckerContext &C, const Expr *E) {
 
 static void printExpectedAllocName(raw_ostream &os, AllocationFamily Family) {
 
-  switch(Family) {
-    case AF_Malloc: os << "malloc()"; return;
-    case AF_CXXNew: os << "'new'"; return;
-    case AF_CXXNewArray: os << "'new[]'"; return;
-    case AF_IfNameIndex: os << "'if_nameindex()'"; return;
-    case AF_InnerBuffer: os << "container-specific allocator"; return;
-    case AF_Alloca:
-    case AF_None: llvm_unreachable("not a deallocation expression");
+  switch (Family.kind()) {
+  case AF_Malloc:
+    os << "malloc()";
+    return;
+  case AF_CXXNew:
+    os << "'new'";
+    return;
+  case AF_CXXNewArray:
+    os << "'new[]'";
+    return;
+  case AF_IfNameIndex:
+    os << "'if_nameindex()'";
+    return;
+  case AF_InnerBuffer:
+    os << "container-specific allocator";
+    return;
+  case AF_Custom:
+    os << Family.name().value();
+    return;
+  case AF_Alloca:
+  case AF_None:
+    llvm_unreachable("not a deallocation expression");
----------------
steakhal wrote:

I'd suggest swapping this `llvm_unreachable` to an `assert(false && "not a deallocation expression"); return;` as this code is probably not in the hot path, thus the use of `llvm_unreachable` is unjustified.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98941