[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