[cfe-dev] Static Analyzer - tracking values through indirection?

[Gábor Kozár]

Hi Jordan,

They are in the same TU, in fact, inside the very same file. I'll be able
to give you further details (e.g. the dump()-ed SVals) on Monday.

Can it be that support for same-TU inter-procedural analysis was added
after 3.2? We're using clang 3.2 to avoid stability and
backward-compatibility issues.

Thanks!

Gabor


2013/5/2 Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com>

> I think you mean cross-translation-unit analysis. IPA within one
> translation unit has been supported for a while. Just to be sure, does your
> example work if you put definitions of DummyTransaction's methods in the
> same translation unit?
>
> Jordan
>
>
> On May 2, 2013, at 8:16 , Gábor Kozár <kozargabor at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Never mind this e-mail, I realized that tracking this would involve
> inter-procedural analysis, which the Static Analyzer currently does not
> support.
>
> Sorry for the spam!
>
> Gabor
>
>
> 2013/4/30 Gábor Kozár <kozargabor at gmail.com>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I need to write a checker to make sure that the state of the transaction
>> is checked after commit. This is working fine is basic cases, but it seems
>> to fail when I introduce any level of indirection. For example, consider
>> the following:
>>
>> class TransactionPtr
>> {
>> public:
>>     TransactionPtr(DummyTransaction& tr) : m_tr(tr) {}
>>
>>     DummyTransaction* getTransaction() { return &m_tr; }
>>
>> private:
>>     DummyTransaction& m_tr;
>> };
>>
>> int main(int argc, char* argv[])
>> {
>>     DummyTransaction tr;
>>     TransactionPtr trp(tr);
>>
>>     trp.getTransaction()->commit();
>>
>>     if(tr.isSuccessful()) return 0;
>>     else return 1;
>> }
>>
>> Running my checker on this reveals that the analyzer has no idea of the
>> connection between trp.m_tr and tr, and so it fails to detect an issue with
>> the above code.
>>
>> I also tried checkBind(), but it is not called in relation to the
>> TransactionPtr trp(tr); line.
>>
>> Is this a known limitation, or am I missing something here? I also tried
>> getBaseRegion(), getSuperRegion(), which didn't lead anywhere.
>> getMemorySpace() on the other hand points to UnknownSpaceRegion.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Gabor
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20130502/ed658e82/attachment.html>