| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This avoids new warnings due to D68912 adds -Wrange-loop-analysis to -Wall.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71809
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Traditionally, clang-tidy uses the term check, and the analyzer uses checker,
but in the very early years, this wasn't the case, and code originating from the
early 2010's still incorrectly refer to checkers as checks.
This patch attempts to hunt down most of these, aiming to refer to checkers as
checkers, but preserve references to callback functions (like checkPreCall) as
checks.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140
llvm-svn: 371760
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This patch introduces a new `analyzer-config` configuration:
`-analyzer-config silence-checkers`
which could be used to silence the given checkers.
It accepts a semicolon separated list, packed into quotation marks, e.g:
`-analyzer-config silence-checkers="core.DivideZero;core.NullDereference"`
It could be used to "disable" core checkers, so they model the analysis as
before, just if some of them are too noisy it prevents to emit reports.
This patch also adds support for that new option to the scan-build.
Passing the option `-disable-checker core.DivideZero` to the scan-build
will be transferred to `-analyzer-config silence-checkers=core.DivideZero`.
Reviewed By: NoQ, Szelethus
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66042
llvm-svn: 369078
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
developer
Same patch as D62093, but for checker/plugin options, the only
difference being that options for alpha checkers are implicitly marked
as alpha.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62093
llvm-svn: 361566
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
These options are now only visible under
-analyzer-checker-option-help-developer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61839
llvm-svn: 361561
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously, the only way to display the list of available checkers was
to invoke the analyzer with -analyzer-checker-help frontend flag. This
however wasn't really great from a maintainer standpoint: users came
across checkers meant strictly for development purposes that weren't to
be tinkered with, or those that were still in development. This patch
creates a clearer division in between these categories.
From now on, we'll have 3 flags to display the list checkers. These
lists are mutually exclusive and can be used in any combination (for
example to display both stable and alpha checkers).
-analyzer-checker-help: Displays the list for stable, production ready
checkers.
-analyzer-checker-help-alpha: Displays the list for in development
checkers. Enabling is discouraged
for non-development purposes.
-analyzer-checker-help-developer: Modeling and debug checkers. Modeling
checkers shouldn't be enabled/disabled
by hand, and debug checkers shouldn't
be touched by users.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62093
llvm-svn: 361558
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add the new frontend flag -analyzer-checker-option-help to display all
checker/package options.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57858
llvm-svn: 361552
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Validate whether the option exists, and also whether the supplied value is of
the correct type. With this patch, invoking the analyzer should be, at least
in the frontend mode, a lot safer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57860
llvm-svn: 361011
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The more entries we have in AnalyzerOptions::ConfigTable, the more helpful
debug.ConfigDumper is. With this patch, I'm pretty confident that it'll now emit
the entire state of the analyzer, minus the frontend flags.
It would be nice to reserve the config table specifically to checker options
only, as storing the regular analyzer configs is kinda redundant.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57922
llvm-svn: 361006
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
-analyzer-checker-help, but do under the new flag -analyzer-checker-help-hidden
During my work on analyzer dependencies, I created a great amount of new
checkers that emitted no diagnostics at all, and were purely modeling some
function or another.
However, the user shouldn't really disable/enable these by hand, hence this
patch, which hides these by default. I intentionally chose not to hide alpha
checkers, because they have a scary enough name, in my opinion, to cause no
surprise when they emit false positives or cause crashes.
The patch introduces the Hidden bit into the TableGen files (you may remember
it before I removed it in D53995), and checkers that are either marked as
hidden, or are in a package that is marked hidden won't be displayed under
-analyzer-checker-help. -analyzer-checker-help-hidden, a new flag meant for
developers only, displays the full list.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60925
llvm-svn: 359720
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
TL;DR:
* Add checker and package options to the TableGen files
* Added a new class called CmdLineOption, and both Package and Checker recieved
a list<CmdLineOption> field.
* Added every existing checker and package option to Checkers.td.
* The CheckerRegistry class
* Received some comments to most of it's inline classes
* Received the CmdLineOption and PackageInfo inline classes, a list of
CmdLineOption was added to CheckerInfo and PackageInfo
* Added addCheckerOption and addPackageOption
* Added a new field called Packages, used in addPackageOptions, filled up in
addPackage
Detailed description:
In the last couple months, a lot of effort was put into tightening the
analyzer's command line interface. The main issue is that it's spectacularly
easy to mess up a lenghty enough invocation of the analyzer, and the user was
given no warnings or errors at all in that case.
We can divide the effort of resolving this into several chapters:
* Non-checker analyzer configurations:
Gather every analyzer configuration into a dedicated file. Emit errors for
non-existent configurations or incorrect values. Be able to list these
configurations. Tighten AnalyzerOptions interface to disallow making such
a mistake in the future.
* Fix the "Checker Naming Bug" by reimplementing checker dependencies:
When cplusplus.InnerPointer was enabled, it implicitly registered
unix.Malloc, which implicitly registered some sort of a modeling checker
from the CStringChecker family. This resulted in all of these checker
objects recieving the name "cplusplus.InnerPointer", making AnalyzerOptions
asking for the wrong checker options from the command line:
cplusplus.InnerPointer:Optimisic
istead of
unix.Malloc:Optimistic.
This was resolved by making CheckerRegistry responsible for checker
dependency handling, instead of checkers themselves.
* Checker options: (this patch included!)
Same as the first item, but for checkers.
(+ minor fixes here and there, and everything else that is yet to come)
There were several issues regarding checker options, that non-checker
configurations didn't suffer from: checker plugins are loaded runtime, and they
could add new checkers and new options, meaning that unlike for non-checker
configurations, we can't collect every checker option purely by generating code.
Also, as seen from the "Checker Naming Bug" issue raised above, they are very
rarely used in practice, and all sorts of skeletons fell out of the closet while
working on this project.
They were extremely problematic for users as well, purely because of how long
they were. Consider the following monster of a checker option:
alpha.cplusplus.UninitializedObject:CheckPointeeInitialization=false
While we were able to verify whether the checker itself (the part before the
colon) existed, any errors past that point were unreported, easily resulting
in 7+ hours of analyses going to waste.
This patch, similarly to how dependencies were reimplemented, uses TableGen to
register checker options into Checkers.td, so that Checkers.inc now contains
entries for both checker and package options. Using the preprocessor,
Checkers.inc is converted into code in CheckerRegistry, adding every builtin
(checkers and packages that have an entry in the Checkers.td file) checker and
package option to the registry. The new addPackageOption and addCheckerOption
functions expose the same functionality to statically-linked non-builtin and
plugin checkers and packages as well.
Emitting errors for incorrect user input, being able to list these options, and
some other functionalies will land in later patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57855
llvm-svn: 358752
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Ideally, there is no reason behind not being able to depend on checkers that
come from a different plugin (or on builtin checkers) -- however, this is only
possible if all checkers are added to the registry before resolving checker
dependencies. Since I used a binary search in my addDependency method, this also
resulted in an assertion failure (due to CheckerRegistry::Checkers not being
sorted), since the function used by plugins to register their checkers
(clang_registerCheckers) calls addDependency.
This patch resolves this issue by only noting which dependencies have to
established when addDependency is called, and resolves them at a later stage
when no more checkers are added to the registry, by which point
CheckerRegistry::Checkers is already sorted.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59461
llvm-svn: 358750
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 358729
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59459
llvm-svn: 358695
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59458
llvm-svn: 358694
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
some in CheckerRegistry
There are barely any lines I haven't changed in these files, so I think I could
might as well leave it in an LLVM coding style conforming state. I also renamed
2 functions and moved addDependency out of line to ease on followup patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59457
llvm-svn: 358676
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Unfortunately, up until now, the fact that certain checkers depended on one
another was known, but how these actually unfolded was hidden deep within the
implementation. For example, many checkers (like RetainCount, Malloc or CString)
modelled a certain functionality, and exposed certain reportable bug types to
the user. For example, while MallocChecker models many many different types of
memory handling, the actual "unix.MallocChecker" checker the user was exposed to
was merely and option to this modeling part.
Other than this being an ugly mess, this issue made resolving the checker naming
issue almost impossible. (The checker naming issue being that if a checker
registered more than one checker within its registry function, both checker
object recieved the same name) Also, if the user explicitly disabled a checker
that was a dependency of another that _was_ explicitly enabled, it implicitly,
without "telling" the user, reenabled it.
Clearly, changing this to a well structured, declarative form, where the
handling of dependencies are done on a higher level is very much preferred.
This patch, among the detailed things later, makes checkers declare their
dependencies within the TableGen file Checkers.td, and exposes the same
functionality to plugins and statically linked non-generated checkers through
CheckerRegistry::addDependency. CheckerRegistry now resolves these dependencies,
makes sure that checkers are added to CheckerManager in the correct order,
and makes sure that if a dependency is disabled, so will be every checker that
depends on it.
In detail:
* Add a new field to the Checker class in CheckerBase.td called Dependencies,
which is a list of Checkers.
* Move unix checkers before cplusplus, as there is no forward declaration in
tblgen :/
* Add the following new checkers:
- StackAddrEscapeBase
- StackAddrEscapeBase
- CStringModeling
- DynamicMemoryModeling (base of the MallocChecker family)
- IteratorModeling (base of the IteratorChecker family)
- ValistBase
- SecuritySyntaxChecker (base of bcmp, bcopy, etc...)
- NSOrCFErrorDerefChecker (base of NSErrorChecker and CFErrorChecker)
- IvarInvalidationModeling (base of IvarInvalidation checker family)
- RetainCountBase (base of RetainCount and OSObjectRetainCount)
* Clear up and registry functions in MallocChecker, happily remove old FIXMEs.
* Add a new addDependency function to CheckerRegistry.
* Neatly format RUN lines in files I looked at while debugging.
Big thanks to Artem Degrachev for all the guidance through this project!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54438
llvm-svn: 352287
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
weren't recognized
My last patch, D56989, moved the validation of whether a checker exists into
its constructor, but we do support statically linked (and non-plugin) checkers
that were do not have an entry in Checkers.td. However, the handling of this
happens after the creation of the CheckerRegistry object.
This patch fixes this bug by moving even this functionality into
CheckerRegistry's constructor.
llvm-svn: 352284
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
specified in command line arguments
I added a new enum to CheckerInfo, so we can easily track whether the check is
explicitly enabled, explicitly disabled, or isn't specified in this regard.
Checkers belonging in the latter category may be implicitly enabled through
dependencies in the followup patch. I also made sure that this is done within
CheckerRegisty's constructor, leading to very significant simplifications in
its query-like methods.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56989
llvm-svn: 352282
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Since pretty much all methods of CheckerRegistry has AnalyzerOptions as an
argument, it makes sense to just simply require it in it's constructor.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56988
llvm-svn: 352279
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
SARIF exports.
This adds anchors to all of the documented checks so that you can directly link to a check by a stable name. This is useful because the SARIF file format has a field for specifying a URI to documentation for a rule and some viewers, like CodeSonar, make use of this information. These links are then exposed through the SARIF exporter.
llvm-svn: 349812
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now that CheckerRegistry lies in Frontend, we can finally eliminate
ClangCheckerRegistry. Fortunately, this also provides us with a
DiagnosticsEngine, so I went ahead and removed some parameters from it's
methods.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54437
llvm-svn: 349280
|
|
|
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
|
