[clang] nonblocking/nonallocating attributes: 2nd pass caller/callee analysis (PR #99656)

via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jul 25 20:45:12 PDT 2024


================
@@ -2397,6 +2397,1262 @@ class UnsafeBufferUsageReporter : public UnsafeBufferUsageHandler {
 };
 } // namespace
 
+// =============================================================================
+
+namespace FXAnalysis {
+
+enum class DiagnosticID : uint8_t {
+  None = 0, // sentinel for an empty Diagnostic
+  Throws,
+  Catches,
+  CallsObjC,
+  AllocatesMemory,
+  HasStaticLocal,
+  AccessesThreadLocal,
+
+  // These only apply to callees, where the analysis stops at the Decl
+  DeclDisallowsInference,
+
+  CallsDeclWithoutEffect,
+  CallsExprWithoutEffect,
+};
+
+// Holds an effect diagnosis, potentially for the entire duration of the
+// analysis phase, in order to refer to it when explaining why a caller has been
+// made unsafe by a callee.
+struct Diagnostic {
+  FunctionEffect Effect;
+  DiagnosticID ID = DiagnosticID::None;
+  SourceLocation Loc;
+  const Decl *Callee = nullptr; // only valid for Calls*
+
+  Diagnostic() = default;
+
+  Diagnostic(const FunctionEffect &Effect, DiagnosticID ID, SourceLocation Loc,
+             const Decl *Callee = nullptr)
+      : Effect(Effect), ID(ID), Loc(Loc), Callee(Callee) {}
+};
+
+enum class SpecialFuncType : uint8_t { None, OperatorNew, OperatorDelete };
+enum class CallType {
+  // unknown: probably function pointer
+  Unknown,
+  Function,
+  Virtual,
+  Block
+};
+
+// Return whether a function's effects CAN be verified.
+// The question of whether it SHOULD be verified is independent.
+static bool functionIsVerifiable(const FunctionDecl *FD) {
+  if (!(FD->hasBody() || FD->isInlined())) {
----------------
Sirraide wrote:

Shouldn’t checking `hasBody()` be enough here?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99656


More information about the cfe-commits mailing list