[clang] [analyzer] Workaround for unintended slowdown (scope increase) (PR #136720)
DonĂ¡t Nagy via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Apr 22 09:01:07 PDT 2025
================
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config unroll-loops=true,cfg-loopexit=true -verify -std=c++14 -analyzer-config exploration_strategy=unexplored_first_queue %s
-// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config unroll-loops=true,cfg-loopexit=true,exploration_strategy=dfs -verify -std=c++14 -DDFS=1 %s
+// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config unroll-loops=true,cfg-loopexit=true -verify=expected,default -std=c++14 -analyzer-config exploration_strategy=unexplored_first_queue %s
+// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config unroll-loops=true,cfg-loopexit=true,exploration_strategy=dfs -verify=expected,dfs -std=c++14 %s
----------------
NagyDonat wrote:
I'm leaning towards eliminating the alternative RUN: line that uses `dfs` because the only difference between `dfs` and the default exploration algorithm is a "control group" testcase where `unroll-loops` does not activate.
I'll probably do so in a separate follow-up commit.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136720
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list