| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Checkers are now required to specify whether they're creating a
path-sensitive report or a path-insensitive report by constructing an
object of the respective type.
This makes BugReporter more independent from the rest of the Static Analyzer
because all Analyzer-specific code is now in sub-classes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66572
llvm-svn: 371450
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now that we've moved to C++14, we no longer need the llvm::make_unique
implementation from STLExtras.h. This patch is a mechanical replacement
of (hopefully) all the llvm::make_unique instances across the monorepo.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66259
llvm-svn: 368942
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Since D57922, the config table contains every checker option, and it's default
value, so having it as an argument for getChecker*Option is redundant.
By the time any of the getChecker*Option function is called, we verified the
value in CheckerRegistry (after D57860), so we can confidently assert here, as
any irregularities detected at this point must be a programmer error. However,
in compatibility mode, verification won't happen, so the default value must be
restored.
This implies something else, other than adding removing one more potential point
of failure -- debug.ConfigDumper will always contain valid values for
checker/package options!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59195
llvm-svn: 361042
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Under the term "subchecker", I mean checkers that do not have a checker class on
their own, like unix.MallocChecker to unix.DynamicMemoryModeling.
Since a checker object was required in order to retrieve checker options,
subcheckers couldn't possess options on their own.
This patch is also an excuse to change the argument order of getChecker*Option,
it always bothered me, now it resembles the actual command line argument
(checkername:option=value).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57579
llvm-svn: 355297
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Introduce the boolean ento::shouldRegister##CHECKERNAME(const LangOptions &LO)
function very similarly to ento::register##CHECKERNAME. This will force every
checker to implement this function, but maybe it isn't that bad: I saw a lot of
ObjC or C++ specific checkers that should probably not register themselves based
on some LangOptions (mine too), but they do anyways.
A big benefit of this is that all registry functions now register their checker,
once it is called, registration is guaranteed.
This patch is a part of a greater effort to reinvent checker registration, more
info here: D54438#1315953
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55424
llvm-svn: 352277
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
ClangCheckerRegistry is a very non-obvious, poorly documented, weird concept.
It derives from CheckerRegistry, and is placed in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend,
whereas it's base is located in lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core. It was, from what I can
imagine, used to circumvent the problem that the registry functions of the
checkers are located in the clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers library, but that
library depends on clangStaticAnalyzerCore. However, clangStaticAnalyzerFrontend
depends on both of those libraries.
One can make the observation however, that CheckerRegistry has no place in Core,
it isn't used there at all! The only place where it is used is Frontend, which
is where it ultimately belongs.
This move implies that since
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ClangCheckers.h only contained a single function:
class CheckerRegistry;
void registerBuiltinCheckers(CheckerRegistry ®istry);
it had to re purposed, as CheckerRegistry is no longer available to
clangStaticAnalyzerCheckers. It was renamed to BuiltinCheckerRegistration.h,
which actually describes it a lot better -- it does not contain the registration
functions for checkers, but only those generated by the tblgen files.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54436
llvm-svn: 349275
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
have to be registered
One of the reasons why AnalyzerOptions is so chaotic is that options can be
retrieved from the command line whenever and wherever. This allowed for some
options to be forgotten for a looooooong time. Have you ever heard of
"region-store-small-struct-limit"? In order to prevent this in the future, I'm
proposing to restrict AnalyzerOptions' interface so that only checker options
can be retrieved without special getters. I would like to make every option be
accessible only through a getter, but checkers from plugins are a thing, so I'll
have to figure something out for that.
This also forces developers who'd like to add a new option to register it
properly in the .def file.
This is done by
* making the third checker pointer parameter non-optional, and checked by an
assert to be non-null.
* I added new, but private non-checkers option initializers, meant only for
internal use,
* Renamed these methods accordingly (mind the consistent name for once with
getBooleanOption!):
- getOptionAsString -> getCheckerStringOption,
- getOptionAsInteger -> getCheckerIntegerOption
* The 3 functions meant for initializing data members (with the not very
descriptive getBooleanOption, getOptionAsString and getOptionAsUInt names)
were renamed to be overloads of the getAndInitOption function name.
* All options were in some way retrieved via getCheckerOption. I removed it, and
moved the logic to getStringOption and getCheckerStringOption. This did cause
some code duplication, but that's the only way I could do it, now that checker
and non-checker options are separated. Note that the non-checker version
inserts the new option to the ConfigTable with the default value, but the
checker version only attempts to find already existing entries. This is how
it always worked, but this is clunky and I might end reworking that too, so we
can eventually get a ConfigTable that contains the entire configuration of the
analyzer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53483
llvm-svn: 346113
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
mprotect() allows setting memory access flags similarly to mmap(),
causing similar security issues if these flags are needlessly broad.
Patch by David Carlier!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44250
llvm-svn: 327098
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is a security check that warns when both PROT_WRITE and PROT_EXEC are
set during mmap(). If mmap()ed memory is both writable and executable, it makes
it easier for the attacker to execute arbitrary code when contents of this
memory are compromised. Some applications require such mmap()s though, such as
different sorts of JIT.
Re-applied after a revert in r324167.
Temporarily stays in the alpha package because it needs a better way of
determining macro values that are not immediately available in the AST.
Patch by David Carlier!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42645
llvm-svn: 326405
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Due to Buildbot failures - most likely that's because target triples were not
specified in the tests, even though the checker behaves differently with
different target triples.
llvm-svn: 324167
|
|
|
This is a security check which is disabled by default but will be enabled
whenever the user consciously enables the security package. If mmap()ed memory
is both writable and executable, it makes it easier for the attacker to execute
arbitrary code when contents of this memory are compromised. Some applications
require such mmap()s though, such as different sorts of JIT.
Patch by David Carlier!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42645
llvm-svn: 324166
|
