-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.3k
[analyzer] Do list initialization for CXXNewExpr with initializer list arg #127702
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Michael Flanders (Flandini) ChangesFixes #116444. Closed #127700 because I accidentally updated it in github UI. Current vs expected behaviorPreviously, the result of a In this example:
there would be a binding of ChangesThis PR swaps around the handling of typed value regions (seems to be the usual region type when doing non-CXX-new-expr list initialization) and symbolic regions (the result of the CXX new expr), so that symbolic regions also get list initialized. In the below snippet, it swaps the order of the two conditionals. llvm-project/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp Lines 2426 to 2448 in 8529bd7
Followup workThis PR only makes CSA do list init for I've added some straightforward test cases here for the Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127702.diff 3 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
index f7020da2e6da2..c5c0f34d0383d 100644
--- a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
@@ -1059,16 +1059,36 @@ void ExprEngine::VisitCXXNewExpr(const CXXNewExpr *CNE, ExplodedNode *Pred,
if (!NewN)
return;
- // If the type is not a record, we won't have a CXXConstructExpr as an
- // initializer. Copy the value over.
- if (const Expr *Init = CNE->getInitializer()) {
- if (!isa<CXXConstructExpr>(Init)) {
- assert(Bldr.getResults().size() == 1);
+ const Expr *Init = CNE->getInitializer();
+ if (!Init)
+ return;
+
+ if (const InitListExpr *ILE = dyn_cast<InitListExpr>(Init)) {
+ QualType AllocType = CNE->getAllocatedType();
+ // Semantic form of ILE means that all members have an initializer present
+ // in the ILE
+ if (AllocType->isAggregateType() && ILE->isSemanticForm()) {
+ const CXXRecordDecl *Record = AllocType->getAsCXXRecordDecl();
+ auto ZipIter = llvm::zip_equal(Record->fields(), ILE->children());
+ for (auto [FD, InitExpr] : ZipIter) {
+ SVal FieldLVal = State->getLValue(FD, Result);
+ SVal InitSVal = State->getSVal(InitExpr, LCtx);
+ State = State->bindLoc(FieldLVal, InitSVal, LCtx);
+ }
Bldr.takeNodes(NewN);
- evalBind(Dst, CNE, NewN, Result, State->getSVal(Init, LCtx),
- /*FirstInit=*/IsStandardGlobalOpNewFunction);
+ Bldr.generateNode(CNE, NewN, State);
+ return;
}
}
+
+ // If the type is not a record, we won't have a CXXConstructExpr as an
+ // initializer. Copy the value over.
+ if (!isa<CXXConstructExpr>(Init)) {
+ assert(Bldr.getResults().size() == 1);
+ Bldr.takeNodes(NewN);
+ evalBind(Dst, CNE, NewN, Result, State->getSVal(Init, LCtx),
+ /*FirstInit=*/IsStandardGlobalOpNewFunction);
+ }
}
void ExprEngine::VisitCXXDeleteExpr(const CXXDeleteExpr *CDE,
diff --git a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
index d01b6ae55f611..e376b84f8219f 100644
--- a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
@@ -2425,6 +2425,15 @@ RegionStoreManager::bind(RegionBindingsConstRef B, Loc L, SVal V) {
const MemRegion *R = MemRegVal->getRegion();
+ // Binding directly to a symbolic region should be treated as binding
+ // to element 0.
+ if (const auto *SymReg = dyn_cast<SymbolicRegion>(R)) {
+ QualType Ty = SymReg->getPointeeStaticType();
+ if (Ty->isVoidType())
+ Ty = StateMgr.getContext().CharTy;
+ R = GetElementZeroRegion(SymReg, Ty);
+ }
+
// Check if the region is a struct region.
if (const TypedValueRegion* TR = dyn_cast<TypedValueRegion>(R)) {
QualType Ty = TR->getValueType();
@@ -2438,15 +2447,6 @@ RegionStoreManager::bind(RegionBindingsConstRef B, Loc L, SVal V) {
return bindAggregate(B, TR, V);
}
- // Binding directly to a symbolic region should be treated as binding
- // to element 0.
- if (const auto *SymReg = dyn_cast<SymbolicRegion>(R)) {
- QualType Ty = SymReg->getPointeeStaticType();
- if (Ty->isVoidType())
- Ty = StateMgr.getContext().CharTy;
- R = GetElementZeroRegion(SymReg, Ty);
- }
-
assert((!isa<CXXThisRegion>(R) || !B.lookup(R)) &&
"'this' pointer is not an l-value and is not assignable");
diff --git a/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp b/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
index f50afff25d245..edc41d29e1df1 100644
--- a/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
@@ -254,6 +254,191 @@ void foo() {
}
} // namespace CXX17_aggregate_construction
+namespace newexpr_init_list_initialization {
+struct S {
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+};
+void none_designated() {
+ S *s = new S{13,1};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void none_designated_swapped() {
+ S *s = new S{1,13};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void one_designated_one_not() {
+ S *s = new S{ 1, .bar = 13 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void all_designated() {
+ S *s = new S{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .bar = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void non_designated_array_of_aggr_struct() {
+ S *s = new S[2] { {1, 2}, {3, 4} };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s[0].foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == s[0].bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == s[1].foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(4 == s[1].bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete[] s;
+}
+
+struct WithGaps {
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+ int baz;
+};
+void out_of_order_designated_initializers_with_gaps() {
+ WithGaps *s = new WithGaps{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .baz = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+
+// https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.init.aggr#note-6:
+// Static data members, non-static data members of anonymous
+// union members, and unnamed bit-fields are not considered
+// elements of the aggregate.
+struct NonConsideredFields {
+ int i;
+ static int s;
+ int j;
+ int :17;
+ int k;
+};
+void considered_fields_initd() {
+ auto S = new NonConsideredFields { 1, 2, 3 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == S->i); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == S->j); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == S->k); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete S;
+}
+
+class PubClass {
+public:
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+};
+void public_class_designated_initializers() {
+ S *s = new S{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .bar = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+
+union UnionTestTy {
+ int x;
+ char y;
+};
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_no_designator() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_designated_first_field() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{ .x = 14 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(14 == u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_designated_non_first_field() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{ .y = 3 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+
+union UnionTestTyWithDefaultMemberInit {
+ int x;
+ char y = 14;
+};
+void union_with_default_member_init_empty_init_list() {
+ auto U = new UnionTestTyWithDefaultMemberInit{};
+ // clang_analyzer_eval(14 == U->y); // TODO: Should be true
+ clang_analyzer_eval(U->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete U;
+}
+
+struct Inner {
+ int bar;
+};
+struct Nested {
+ int foo;
+ Inner inner;
+ int baz;
+};
+void nested_aggregates() {
+ auto N = new Nested{};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N1 = new Nested{1};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N2 = new Nested{.baz = 14};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(14 == N->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N3 = new Nested{1,2,3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N4 = new Nested{1, {}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N5 = new Nested{{},{},{}};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N6 = new Nested{1, {.bar = 2}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N7 = new Nested{1, {2}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ delete N;
+ delete N1;
+ delete N2;
+ delete N3;
+ delete N4;
+ delete N5;
+ delete N6;
+ delete N7;
+}
+} // namespace newexpr_init_list_initialization
+
namespace CXX17_transparent_init_list_exprs {
class A {};
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-static-analyzer-1 Author: Michael Flanders (Flandini) ChangesFixes #116444. Closed #127700 because I accidentally updated it in github UI. Current vs expected behaviorPreviously, the result of a In this example:
there would be a binding of ChangesThis PR swaps around the handling of typed value regions (seems to be the usual region type when doing non-CXX-new-expr list initialization) and symbolic regions (the result of the CXX new expr), so that symbolic regions also get list initialized. In the below snippet, it swaps the order of the two conditionals. llvm-project/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp Lines 2426 to 2448 in 8529bd7
Followup workThis PR only makes CSA do list init for I've added some straightforward test cases here for the Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127702.diff 3 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
index f7020da2e6da2..c5c0f34d0383d 100644
--- a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp
@@ -1059,16 +1059,36 @@ void ExprEngine::VisitCXXNewExpr(const CXXNewExpr *CNE, ExplodedNode *Pred,
if (!NewN)
return;
- // If the type is not a record, we won't have a CXXConstructExpr as an
- // initializer. Copy the value over.
- if (const Expr *Init = CNE->getInitializer()) {
- if (!isa<CXXConstructExpr>(Init)) {
- assert(Bldr.getResults().size() == 1);
+ const Expr *Init = CNE->getInitializer();
+ if (!Init)
+ return;
+
+ if (const InitListExpr *ILE = dyn_cast<InitListExpr>(Init)) {
+ QualType AllocType = CNE->getAllocatedType();
+ // Semantic form of ILE means that all members have an initializer present
+ // in the ILE
+ if (AllocType->isAggregateType() && ILE->isSemanticForm()) {
+ const CXXRecordDecl *Record = AllocType->getAsCXXRecordDecl();
+ auto ZipIter = llvm::zip_equal(Record->fields(), ILE->children());
+ for (auto [FD, InitExpr] : ZipIter) {
+ SVal FieldLVal = State->getLValue(FD, Result);
+ SVal InitSVal = State->getSVal(InitExpr, LCtx);
+ State = State->bindLoc(FieldLVal, InitSVal, LCtx);
+ }
Bldr.takeNodes(NewN);
- evalBind(Dst, CNE, NewN, Result, State->getSVal(Init, LCtx),
- /*FirstInit=*/IsStandardGlobalOpNewFunction);
+ Bldr.generateNode(CNE, NewN, State);
+ return;
}
}
+
+ // If the type is not a record, we won't have a CXXConstructExpr as an
+ // initializer. Copy the value over.
+ if (!isa<CXXConstructExpr>(Init)) {
+ assert(Bldr.getResults().size() == 1);
+ Bldr.takeNodes(NewN);
+ evalBind(Dst, CNE, NewN, Result, State->getSVal(Init, LCtx),
+ /*FirstInit=*/IsStandardGlobalOpNewFunction);
+ }
}
void ExprEngine::VisitCXXDeleteExpr(const CXXDeleteExpr *CDE,
diff --git a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
index d01b6ae55f611..e376b84f8219f 100644
--- a/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
@@ -2425,6 +2425,15 @@ RegionStoreManager::bind(RegionBindingsConstRef B, Loc L, SVal V) {
const MemRegion *R = MemRegVal->getRegion();
+ // Binding directly to a symbolic region should be treated as binding
+ // to element 0.
+ if (const auto *SymReg = dyn_cast<SymbolicRegion>(R)) {
+ QualType Ty = SymReg->getPointeeStaticType();
+ if (Ty->isVoidType())
+ Ty = StateMgr.getContext().CharTy;
+ R = GetElementZeroRegion(SymReg, Ty);
+ }
+
// Check if the region is a struct region.
if (const TypedValueRegion* TR = dyn_cast<TypedValueRegion>(R)) {
QualType Ty = TR->getValueType();
@@ -2438,15 +2447,6 @@ RegionStoreManager::bind(RegionBindingsConstRef B, Loc L, SVal V) {
return bindAggregate(B, TR, V);
}
- // Binding directly to a symbolic region should be treated as binding
- // to element 0.
- if (const auto *SymReg = dyn_cast<SymbolicRegion>(R)) {
- QualType Ty = SymReg->getPointeeStaticType();
- if (Ty->isVoidType())
- Ty = StateMgr.getContext().CharTy;
- R = GetElementZeroRegion(SymReg, Ty);
- }
-
assert((!isa<CXXThisRegion>(R) || !B.lookup(R)) &&
"'this' pointer is not an l-value and is not assignable");
diff --git a/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp b/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
index f50afff25d245..edc41d29e1df1 100644
--- a/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp
@@ -254,6 +254,191 @@ void foo() {
}
} // namespace CXX17_aggregate_construction
+namespace newexpr_init_list_initialization {
+struct S {
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+};
+void none_designated() {
+ S *s = new S{13,1};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void none_designated_swapped() {
+ S *s = new S{1,13};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void one_designated_one_not() {
+ S *s = new S{ 1, .bar = 13 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void all_designated() {
+ S *s = new S{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .bar = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+void non_designated_array_of_aggr_struct() {
+ S *s = new S[2] { {1, 2}, {3, 4} };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s[0].foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == s[0].bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == s[1].foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(4 == s[1].bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete[] s;
+}
+
+struct WithGaps {
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+ int baz;
+};
+void out_of_order_designated_initializers_with_gaps() {
+ WithGaps *s = new WithGaps{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .baz = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+
+// https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.init.aggr#note-6:
+// Static data members, non-static data members of anonymous
+// union members, and unnamed bit-fields are not considered
+// elements of the aggregate.
+struct NonConsideredFields {
+ int i;
+ static int s;
+ int j;
+ int :17;
+ int k;
+};
+void considered_fields_initd() {
+ auto S = new NonConsideredFields { 1, 2, 3 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == S->i); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == S->j); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == S->k); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete S;
+}
+
+class PubClass {
+public:
+ int foo;
+ int bar;
+};
+void public_class_designated_initializers() {
+ S *s = new S{
+ .foo = 13,
+ .bar = 1,
+ };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(13 == s->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == s->bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ delete s;
+}
+
+union UnionTestTy {
+ int x;
+ char y;
+};
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_no_designator() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_designated_first_field() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{ .x = 14 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(14 == u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+void new_expr_aggr_init_union_designated_non_first_field() {
+ UnionTestTy *u = new UnionTestTy{ .y = 3 };
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == u->y); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(u->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete u;
+}
+
+union UnionTestTyWithDefaultMemberInit {
+ int x;
+ char y = 14;
+};
+void union_with_default_member_init_empty_init_list() {
+ auto U = new UnionTestTyWithDefaultMemberInit{};
+ // clang_analyzer_eval(14 == U->y); // TODO: Should be true
+ clang_analyzer_eval(U->x); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}} TODO: should be undefined, warning
+ delete U;
+}
+
+struct Inner {
+ int bar;
+};
+struct Nested {
+ int foo;
+ Inner inner;
+ int baz;
+};
+void nested_aggregates() {
+ auto N = new Nested{};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N1 = new Nested{1};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N2 = new Nested{.baz = 14};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(14 == N->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N3 = new Nested{1,2,3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N4 = new Nested{1, {}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N5 = new Nested{{},{},{}};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(0 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+
+ auto N6 = new Nested{1, {.bar = 2}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ auto N7 = new Nested{1, {2}, 3};
+ clang_analyzer_eval(1 == N1->foo); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(2 == N1->inner.bar); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+ clang_analyzer_eval(3 == N1->baz); // expected-warning{{FALSE}} TODO: Should be TRUE
+
+ delete N;
+ delete N1;
+ delete N2;
+ delete N3;
+ delete N4;
+ delete N5;
+ delete N6;
+ delete N7;
+}
+} // namespace newexpr_init_list_initialization
+
namespace CXX17_transparent_init_list_exprs {
class A {};
|
e638667
to
12791f2
Compare
Going to add tests for placement new and user-defined placement new operator with list initializers also |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This change looks good to me but the code makes me wonder if we correctly handle placement new.
What about cases like doing placement new into a non-zero'th element of a region like:
void f(S *a[]) {
s[1] = new (S[1]) S{1, 2};
}
If this works as expected, that is great! If it does not, I am OK doing something about it in a follow-up PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I checked the meat of this PR, and spot checked the tests. Everything looked excellent so far.
Many thanks for the PR!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was about to merge this, and I as usual, had a quick sweep before pushing the button.
Unfortunately, I found some subjects to discuss inline.
Haven't had enough free time to add tests for placement new yet. Like Xazax-hun said above, I want to at least try to add some tests to know the status of it with this PR before merging. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we merge this now?
Yes, ready to merge, sorry for the wait. Added a few placement new list initializer tests just now. Seems to work as well for placement new. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Technically, shouldn't one only use the return value of the placement new? Using the original object is technically UB (I know we accept it, and do the right thing, but anyways) maybe we should have a test demonstrating theat it would work with the ret val of placement new too.
Didn't know it was UB, fixed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I left a couple comments to discuss after I merge this PR.
It's good enough to be closed.
Can I merge this @Flandini now? |
Yes, fine to merge |
…t arg (llvm#127702) Fixes llvm#116444. Closed llvm#127700 because I accidentally updated it in github UI. ### Current vs expected behavior Previously, the result of a `CXXNewExpr` was not always list initialized when using an initializer list. In this example: ``` struct S { int x; }; void F() { S *s = new S{1}; delete s; } ``` there would be a binding of `s` to `compoundVal{1}`, but this isn't used during later field binding lookup. After this PR, there is instead a binding of `s->x` to `1`. This is the cause of llvm#116444 since the field binding lookup returns undefined in some cases currently. ### Changes This PR swaps around the handling of typed value regions (seems to be the usual region type when doing non-CXX-new-expr list initialization) and symbolic regions (the result of the CXX new expr), so that symbolic regions also get list initialized. In the below snippet, it swaps the order of the two conditionals. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/8529bd7b964cc9fafe8fece84f7bd12dacb09560/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp#L2426-L2448 ### Followup work This PR only makes CSA do list init for `CXXNewExpr`s. After this, I would like to make some changes to `RegionStoreMananger::bind` in how it handles list initialization generally. I've added some straightforward test cases here for the `new` expr with a list initializer. I started adding some more before realizing that the current general (not just `new` expr) list initialization could be changed to handle more cases like list initialization of unions and arrays (like llvm#54910). Lmk if it is preferred to then leave these test cases out for now.
Fixes #116444.
Closed #127700 because I accidentally updated it in github UI.
Current vs expected behavior
Previously, the result of a
CXXNewExpr
was not always list initialized when using an initializer list.In this example:
there would be a binding of
s
tocompoundVal{1}
, but this isn't used during later field binding lookup. After this PR, there is instead a binding ofs->x
to1
. This is the cause of #116444 since the field binding lookup returns undefined in some cases currently.Changes
This PR swaps around the handling of typed value regions (seems to be the usual region type when doing non-CXX-new-expr list initialization) and symbolic regions (the result of the CXX new expr), so that symbolic regions also get list initialized. In the below snippet, it swaps the order of the two conditionals.
llvm-project/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp
Lines 2426 to 2448 in 8529bd7
Followup work
This PR only makes CSA do list init for
CXXNewExpr
s. After this, I would like to make some changes toRegionStoreMananger::bind
in how it handles list initialization generally.I've added some straightforward test cases here for the
new
expr with a list initializer. I started adding some more before realizing that the current general (not justnew
expr) list initialization could be changed to handle more cases like list initialization of unions and arrays (like #54910). Lmk if it is preferred to then leave these test cases out for now.