From: Artem Dergachev Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:36:53 +0000 (+0000) Subject: [CFG] [analyzer] pr41142: C++17: Skip transparent InitListExprs in ExprEngine. X-Git-Url: https://granicus.if.org/sourcecode?a=commitdiff_plain;h=a7ecb4c15930a731f3e3a653497b9a3ec5668847;p=clang [CFG] [analyzer] pr41142: C++17: Skip transparent InitListExprs in ExprEngine. r356634 didn't fix all the problems caused by r356222 - even though simple constructors involving transparent init-list expressions are now evaluated precisely, many more complicated constructors aren't, for other reasons. The attached test case is an example of a constructor that will never be evaluated precisely - simply because there isn't a constructor there (instead, the program invokes run-time undefined behavior by returning without a return statement that should have constructed the return value). Fix another part of the problem for such situations: evaluate transparent init-list expressions transparently, so that to avoid creating ill-formed "transparent" nonloc::CompoundVals. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59622 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@356969 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 --- diff --git a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineC.cpp b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineC.cpp index 6c1eda622c..11a3befcb1 100644 --- a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineC.cpp +++ b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineC.cpp @@ -704,7 +704,7 @@ void ExprEngine::VisitInitListExpr(const InitListExpr *IE, QualType T = getContext().getCanonicalType(IE->getType()); unsigned NumInitElements = IE->getNumInits(); - if (!IE->isGLValue() && + if (!IE->isGLValue() && !IE->isTransparent() && (T->isArrayType() || T->isRecordType() || T->isVectorType() || T->isAnyComplexType())) { llvm::ImmutableList vals = getBasicVals().getEmptySValList(); diff --git a/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp b/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp index 5853f3aed5..56b0a09d47 100644 --- a/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp +++ b/test/Analysis/initializer.cpp @@ -1,7 +1,17 @@ -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config c++-inlining=constructors -std=c++11 -verify %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config c++-inlining=constructors -std=c++17 -DCPLUSPLUS17 -verify %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config c++-inlining=constructors -std=c++11 -DTEST_INLINABLE_ALLOCATORS -verify %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config c++-inlining=constructors -std=c++17 -DCPLUSPLUS17 -DTEST_INLINABLE_ALLOCATORS -verify %s +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -w -verify %s\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -std=c++11 +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -w -verify %s\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -std=c++17 +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -w -verify %s\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -std=c++11\ +// RUN: -DTEST_INLINABLE_ALLOCATORS +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -w -verify %s\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=core,unix.Malloc,cplusplus.NewDeleteLeaks\ +// RUN: -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -std=c++17\ +// RUN: -DTEST_INLINABLE_ALLOCATORS void clang_analyzer_eval(bool); @@ -232,7 +242,7 @@ void foo() { D d = {}; // no-crash -#ifdef CPLUSPLUS17 +#if __cplusplus >= 201703L C cd = {{}}; // no-crash const C &cdl = {{}}; // no-crash C &&cdr = {{}}; // no-crash @@ -260,4 +270,8 @@ C coo(); void foo2() { C c { coo() }; // no-crash } + +B foo_recursive() { + B b { foo_recursive() }; +} } // namespace CXX17_transparent_init_list_exprs