AnalysisConsumer: use canonical decl for both lookup and store of

visited decls.

Due to redeclarations, the function may have different declarations used
in CallExpr and in the definition. However, we need to use a unique
declaration for both store and lookup in VisitedCallees. This patch
fixes issues with analysis in topological order. A simple test is
included.

Patch by Alex Sidorin!

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15410

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@257318 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

diff --git a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/AnalysisConsumer.cpp b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/AnalysisConsumer.cpp
index bf85c4ca0c60017c957cb9abac813a30070eb385..d1446855e01f38d3501bc53c1deea329ce78f44e 100644 (file)
--- a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/AnalysisConsumer.cpp
+++ b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/AnalysisConsumer.cpp
@@ -496,10 +496,11 @@ void AnalysisConsumer::HandleDeclsCallGraph(const unsigned LocalTUDeclsSize) {
                (Mgr->options.InliningMode == All ? nullptr : &VisitedCallees));
 
     // Add the visited callees to the global visited set.
-    for (SetOfConstDecls::iterator I = VisitedCallees.begin(),
-                                   E = VisitedCallees.end(); I != E; ++I) {
-        Visited.insert(*I);
-    }
+    for (const Decl *Callee : VisitedCallees)
+      // Decls from CallGraph are already canonical. But Decls coming from
+      // CallExprs may be not. We should canonicalize them manually.
+      Visited.insert(isa<ObjCMethodDecl>(Callee) ? Callee
+                                                 : Callee->getCanonicalDecl());
     VisitedAsTopLevel.insert(D);
   }
 }

diff --git a/test/Analysis/inlining/analysis-order.c b/test/Analysis/inlining/analysis-order.c
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..5149818
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/Analysis/inlining/analysis-order.c
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -analyze -analyzer-checker=core.builtin.NoReturnFunctions -analyzer-display-progress %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
+
+// Do not analyze test1() again because it was inlined
+void test1();
+
+void test2() {
+  test1();
+}
+
+void test1() {
+}
+
+// CHECK: analysis-order.c test2
+// CHECK-NEXT: analysis-order.c test1
+// CHECK-NEXT: analysis-order.c test2