[cfe-dev] [Analyzer] StackAddrEscapeChecker & BugReport::addRange()
Artem Dergachev via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Nov 6 08:18:42 PST 2019
This wasn't an intentional change (at least i don't remember ever
intending it) and i can't reproduce the problem on a recent clang. I
didn't try 8.1 but both on 8.0 and on a recent "10.0" master i see the
warning placed at the end of function and the stack variable location
highlighted; there are no obvious changes in the visual output, neither
in the plist output nor in html output).
I don't see a problem with stack variable location highlighting as such.
It won't affect console output where range highlighting is the most
useful as it causes ~~~~~~s to appear, but nonetheless it's pretty harmless.
Path sensitive reports generally don't end up anywhere except the bug
node location unless you mess real hard with your bug report (eg.,
inherit from BugReport to override the virtual method getLocation()).
I guess your observation is at least worth debugging in order to figure
out what exactly is going on and what else is broken (you should
probably try bisecting).
On 06.11.2019 05:31, Ádám Balogh via cfe-dev wrote:
> We experienced some strange anomaly between Clang 8.0 and 8.1: when
> analyzing the same project StackAddrEscapeChecker reported a bug
> “Address of stack memory associated with local variable '<name of
> local>' is still referred to by the global variable '<name of global>'
> upon returning to the caller. This will be a dangling reference” to
> the declaration of the stack variable in 8.0 instead of the exit point
> of the function. In 8.1 the location was correct, thus the end of the
> function. When checking the source code of the checker, the tests and
> also BugReporter.h and .cpp I did not find any change between these
> However I found something strange in StackAddrEscapeChecker which is
> still there: the checker adds the source range of the variable
> declaration to the bugreport which seems to be wrong. The
> documentation of BugReport::addRange() states that “They should be at
> the same source code line as the BugReport location.” The declaration
> is definitely not part of the function exit point (return statement or
> closing bracket).
> Should I try to fix this? I thing we should skip adding range in this
> particular case. Also I think we should add some assertion to
> BugReport::addRange() to avoid such cases. Do you also think that it
> is a good idea?
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-dev