Emit warning when operand to `delete` is allocated with `new[]` or
operand to `delete[]` is allocated with `new`.
rev 2 update:
`getNewExprFromInitListOrExpr` should return `dyn_cast_or_null`
instead of `dyn_cast`, since `E` might be null.
Reviewers: rtrieu, jordan_rose, rsmith
Subscribers: majnemer, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4661
llvm-svn: 237608
This reverts commit 742dc9b6c9686ab52860b7da39c3a126d8a97fbc.
This is generating multiple segfaults in our internal builds.
Test case coming up shortly.
llvm-svn: 237391
Emit warning when operand to `delete` is allocated with `new[]` or
operand to `delete[]` is allocated with `new`.
Reviewers: rtrieu, jordan_rose, rsmith
Subscribers: majnemer, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4661
llvm-svn: 237368
TODO: support realloc(). Currently it is not possible due to the present realloc() handling. Currently RegionState is not being attached to realloc() in case of a zero Size argument.
llvm-svn: 234889
Again, this is being applied in a separate commit so that the previous commit
can be reverted while leaving the test in place.
rdar://problem/20335433
llvm-svn: 233593
This is imitating a pre-r228174 state where ivars are not considered tracked by
default, but with the addition that even ivars /with/ retain count information
(e.g. "[_ivar retain]; [ivar _release];") are not being tracked as well. This is
to ensure that we don't regress on values accessed through both properties and
ivars, which is what r228174 was trying to fix.
The issue occurs in code like this:
[_contentView retain];
[_contentView removeFromSuperview];
[self addSubview:_contentView]; // invalidates 'self'
[_contentView release];
In this case, the call to -addSubview: may change the value of self->_contentView,
and so the analyzer can't be sure that we didn't leak the original _contentView.
This is a correct conservative view of the world, but not a useful one. Until we
have a heuristic that allows us to not consider this a leak, not emitting a
diagnostic is our best bet.
This commit disables all of the ivar-related retain count tests, but does not
remove them to ensure that we don't crash trying to evaluate either valid or
erroneous code. The next commit will add a new test for the example above so
that this commit (and the previous one) can be reverted wholesale when a better
solution is implemented.
Rest of rdar://problem/20335433
llvm-svn: 233592
Give up this checking in order to continue tracking that these values came from
direct ivar access, which will be important in the next commit.
Part of rdar://problem/20335433
llvm-svn: 233591
Fixes https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20744
struct A {
A() = default;
};
Previously the source range of the declaration of A ended at the ')'. It should
include the '= default' part as well. The same for '= delete'.
Note: this will break one of the clang-tidy fixers, which is going to be
addessed in a follow-up patch.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8465
llvm-svn: 233028
Similarly, don't assume +0 if the property's setter is manually implemented.
In both cases, if the property's ownership is explicitly written, then we /do/
assume the ivar has the same ownership.
rdar://problem/20218183
llvm-svn: 232849
CloudABI also supports the arc4random() function. We can enable compiler
warnings for rand(), random() and *rand48() on this system as well.
llvm-svn: 231914
In theory we could assume a CF property is stored at +0 if there's not a custom
setter, but that's not really worth the complexity. What we do know is that a
CF property can't have ownership attributes, and so we shouldn't assume anything
about the ownership of the ivar.
rdar://problem/20076963
llvm-svn: 231553
Modules and Tooling tests in particular tend to want to change the cwd,
so we were missing test coverage in this area on Windows. It should now
be easier to write such portable tests.
llvm-svn: 231029
We expect in general that any nil value has no retain count information
associated with it; violating this results in unexpected state unification
/later/ when we decide to throw the information away. Unexpectedly caching
out can lead to an assertion failure or crash.
rdar://problem/19862648
llvm-svn: 229934
+ separate bug report for "Free alloca()" error to be able to customize checkers responsible for this error.
+ Muted "Free alloca()" error for NewDelete checker that is not responsible for c-allocated memory, turned on for unix.MismatchedDeallocator checker.
+ RefState for alloca() - to be able to detect usage of zero-allocated memory by upcoming ZeroAllocDereference checker.
+ AF_Alloca family to handle alloca() consistently - keep proper family in RefState, handle 'alloca' by getCheckIfTracked() facility, etc.
+ extra tests.
llvm-svn: 229850
PrettyStackTrace now requires the ENABLE_BACKTRACES option. We need to check for that here or these tests fail llvm-lit.
Reviewed by chandlerc
llvm-svn: 228735
to the plist output. This check_name field does not guaranteed to be the
same as the name of the checker in the future.
Reviewer: Anna Zaks
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6841
llvm-svn: 228624
The analyzer thinks that ArraySubscriptExpr cannot be an r-value (ever).
However, it can be in some corner cases. Specifically, C forbids expressions
of unqualified void type from being l-values.
Note, the analyzer will keep modeling the subscript expr as an l-value. The
analyzer should be treating void* as a char array
(https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/Pointer-Arith.html).
llvm-svn: 228249
Instead of handling edge cases (mostly involving blocks), where we have difficulty finding
an allocation statement, allow the allocation site to be in a parent node.
Previously we assumed that the allocation site can always be found in the same frame
as allocation, but there are scenarios in which an element is leaked in a child
frame but is allocated in the parent.
llvm-svn: 228247
A refinement of r204730, itself a refinement of r198953, to better handle
cases where an object is accessed both through a property getter and
through direct ivar access. An object accessed through a property should
always be treated as +0, i.e. not owned by the caller. However, an object
accessed through an ivar may be at +0 or at +1, depending on whether the
ivar is a strong reference. Outside of ARC, we don't always have that
information.
The previous attempt would clear out the +0 provided by a getter, but only
if that +0 hadn't already participated in other retain counting operations.
(That is, "self.foo" is okay, but "[[self.foo retain] autorelease]" is
problematic.) This turned out to not be good enough when our synthesized
getters get involved.
This commit drops the notion of "overridable" reference counting and instead
just tracks whether a value ever came from a (strong) ivar. If it has, we
allow one more release than we otherwise would. This has the added benefit
of being able to catch /some/ overreleases of instance variables, though
it's not likely to come up in practice.
We do still get some false negatives because we currently throw away
refcount state upon assigning a value into an ivar. We should probably
improve on that in the future, especially once we synthesize setters as
well as getters.
rdar://problem/18075108
llvm-svn: 228174
A patch by Daniel DeFreez!
We were previously dropping edges on re-declarations. Store the
canonical declarations in the graph to ensure that different
references to the same function end up reflected with the same call graph
node.
(Note, this might lead to performance fluctuation because call graph
is used to determine the function analysis order.)
llvm-svn: 224398
This suppresses a common false positive when analyzing libc++.
Along the way, introduce some tests to show this checker actually
works with C++ static_cast<>.
llvm-svn: 220160
The return value of mempcpy is only correct when the destination type is
one byte in size. This patch casts the argument to a char* so the
calculation is also correct for structs, ints etc.
A patch by Daniel Fahlgren!
llvm-svn: 219024
in the super class, do not issue the warning about property
in current class's protocol will not be auto synthesized.
// rdar://18179833
llvm-svn: 216769
People have been incorrectly using "-analyzer-disable-checker" to
silence analyzer warnings on a file, when analyzing a project. Add
the "-analyzer-disable-all-checks" option, which would allow the
suppression and suggest it as part of the error message for
"-analyzer-disable-checker". The idea here is to compose this with
"--analyze" so that users can selectively opt out specific files from
static analysis.
llvm-svn: 216763
Do not warn when property declared in class's protocol will be auto-synthesized
by its uper class implementation because super class has also declared this
property while this class has not. Continue to warn if current class
has declared the property also (because this declaration will not result
in a 2nd synthesis).
rdar://18152478
llvm-svn: 216753
Currently the analyzer lazily models some functions using 'BodyFarm',
which constructs a fake function implementation that the analyzer
can simulate that approximates the semantics of the function when
it is called. BodyFarm does this by constructing the AST for
such definitions on-the-fly. One strength of BodyFarm
is that all symbols and types referenced by synthesized function
bodies are contextual adapted to the containing translation unit.
The downside is that these ASTs are hardcoded in Clang's own
source code.
A more scalable model is to allow these models to be defined as source
code in separate "model" files and have the analyzer use those
definitions lazily when a function body is needed. Among other things,
it will allow more customization of the analyzer for specific APIs
and platforms.
This patch provides the initial infrastructure for this feature.
It extends BodyFarm to use an abstract API 'CodeInjector' that can be
used to synthesize function bodies. That 'CodeInjector' is
implemented using a new 'ModelInjector' in libFrontend, which lazily
parses a model file and injects the ASTs into the current translation
unit.
Models are currently found by specifying a 'model-path' as an
analyzer option; if no path is specified the CodeInjector is not
used, thus defaulting to the current behavior in the analyzer.
Models currently contain a single function definition, and can
be found by finding the file <function name>.model. This is an
initial starting point for something more rich, but it bootstraps
this feature for future evolution.
This patch was contributed by Gábor Horváth as part of his
Google Summer of Code project.
Some notes:
- This introduces the notion of a "model file" into
FrontendAction and the Preprocessor. This nomenclature
is specific to the static analyzer, but possibly could be
generalized. Essentially these are sources pulled in
exogenously from the principal translation.
Preprocessor gets a 'InitializeForModelFile' and
'FinalizeForModelFile' which could possibly be hoisted out
of Preprocessor if Preprocessor exposed a new API to
change the PragmaHandlers and some other internal pieces. This
can be revisited.
FrontendAction gets a 'isModelParsingAction()' predicate function
used to allow a new FrontendAction to recycle the Preprocessor
and ASTContext. This name could probably be made something
more general (i.e., not tied to 'model files') at the expense
of losing the intent of why it exists. This can be revisited.
- This is a moderate sized patch; it has gone through some amount of
offline code review. Most of the changes to the non-analyzer
parts are fairly small, and would make little sense without
the analyzer changes.
- Most of the analyzer changes are plumbing, with the interesting
behavior being introduced by ModelInjector.cpp and
ModelConsumer.cpp.
- The new functionality introduced by this change is off-by-default.
It requires an analyzer config option to enable.
llvm-svn: 216550
Also, make it slightly clearer what's being tested by only differentiating integer
literals based on their suffix, rather than using a very large constant.
llvm-svn: 216133
Ismail Pazarbasi