gerazo accepted this revision.
gerazo added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks correct clang-format to me.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54918/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54918
_
gerazo created this revision.
gerazo added reviewers: a.sidorin, r.stahl.
Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
The previous code which avoided infinite recursion (because of reparsing
declarations in function parameter lists) contained SourceRange dependent code
which had some problems when p
gerazo added a comment.
@martong I don't have commit rights. Thanks for your help in advance.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
gerazo updated this revision to Diff 154991.
gerazo marked an inline comment as done.
gerazo added a comment.
Minor fixes for Aleksei's comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
Index: unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
==
gerazo marked 2 inline comments as done.
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp:234
+assert(ToAST);
+createVirtualFileIfNeeded(ToAST.get(), It->FileName, It->Code);
+return &*It;
a.sidorin wrote:
> Can we move the
gerazo added a comment.
@a.sidorin what do you think?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
gerazo updated this revision to Diff 152055.
gerazo added a comment.
Added @martong 's suggestions.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
Index: unittests/AST/ASTImporterTest.cpp
gerazo updated this revision to Diff 151533.
gerazo added a comment.
Updated to not conflict with and use the stuff implemented in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47445 (so became a bit smaller)
Now, it is ready for a review. Enjoy!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
gerazo added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47946#1127679, @balazske wrote:
> Problem: This change interferes with https://reviews.llvm.org/D47445.
> Probably that should be committed, it is approved already.
Ok. I'll wait for the other thing to be committed and I will rework this
im
gerazo created this revision.
gerazo added reviewers: a.sidorin, r.stahl.
Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Importing a function having a struct definition in the parameter list causes a
crash in the importer via infinite recursion. This patch avoids the crash and
reports such functions as
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: tools/scan-build-py/libscanbuild/analyze.py:702
+
# To have good results from static analyzer certain compiler options shall be
george.karpenkov wrote:
> This blank line should not be in this PR.
Scheduled to be done.
gerazo added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691#954740, @george.karpenkov wrote:
> I've tried using the patch, and I got blocked at the following: CTU options
> are only exposed when one goes through `analyze-build` frontend, which
> requires `compile_commands.json` to be present. I'
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: tools/scan-build-py/libscanbuild/analyze.py:44
+CTU_FUNCTION_MAP_FILENAME = 'externalFnMap.txt'
+CTU_TEMP_FNMAP_FOLDER = 'tmpExternalFnMaps'
george.karpenkov wrote:
> gerazo wrote:
> > george.karpenkov wrote:
> > > What
gerazo added a comment.
The code modifications are coming soon (after doing some extensive testing) for
the scan-build part.
Comment at: tools/scan-build-py/libscanbuild/analyze.py:223
+ctu_config = get_ctu_config(args)
+if ctu_config.collect:
+shutil.rmtree(ct
gerazo added a comment.
Thanks George for the review. I will start working on the code right away. I've
tried to answer the simpler cases.
Comment at: tools/scan-build-py/libscanbuild/analyze.py:44
+CTU_FUNCTION_MAP_FILENAME = 'externalFnMap.txt'
+CTU_TEMP_FNMAP_FOLDER = 'tm
gerazo added a comment.
Before abandoning this patch and rewriting it, I would like to get a thumbs up
for my plans: I will reimplement all functionality included here but without
creating a new checker. Some parts which relate to specific checkers will be
put into the corresponding checkers (l
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: tools/xtu-analysis/xtu-analyze.py:29
+
+threading_factor = int(multiprocessing.cpu_count() * 1.5)
+analyser_output_formats = ['plist-multi-file', 'plist', 'plist-html',
danielmarjamaki wrote:
> does this mean that if ther
gerazo marked an inline comment as done.
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp:5221
IdentifierInfo *ToII = Importer.Import(S->getOutputIdentifier(I));
-if (!ToII)
- return nullptr;
+// ToII is nullptr when no symbolic name is given fo
gerazo updated this revision to Diff 91541.
gerazo added a comment.
Better check not letting a real import problem passing through
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30831
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
test/ASTMerge/asm/Inputs/asm-function.cpp
test/ASTMerge/asm/test.cpp
Index: test/ASTMerge/asm
gerazo created this revision.
Do not drop the import of the whole function just because an asm statement in
it has some missing symbolic names.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30831
Files:
lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
test/ASTMerge/asm/Inputs/asm-function.cpp
test/ASTMerge/asm/test.cpp
Index: tes
gerazo added a comment.
> Stepping back a bit, what do you consider "dirty" vs "clean"? It seems that
> you are looking for prove that the values are known to be within the bounds
> of min and max int values. What happens if there is a comparison to an
> unknown symbolic value? Should that be c
gerazo marked an inline comment as done.
gerazo added a comment.
Hmm... I am thinking on this issue for a week now...
I've played with the idea of implementing cleansing rules in
GenericTaintChecker. It would be elegant but unfortunately, I have to think
they are not general. Cleansing of a str
gerazo marked an inline comment as done.
gerazo added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/DirtyScalarChecker.cpp:184
+Ty = Ctx.IntTy;
+ if (!Ty->isIntegerType() || Ctx.getIntWidth(Ty) <= TooNarrowForBoundCheck)
+return false;
a.sidor
gerazo added a comment.
Hi, did you have time to check my changes?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
gerazo marked an inline comment as done.
gerazo added a comment.
So thank you again for the valuable questions.
In this checker, I give warnings for values which are both tainted and were
also not checked by the programmer. So unlike GenericTaintChecker, I do
implement the boundedness check here
gerazo marked 6 inline comments as done.
gerazo added a comment.
Thank you very much for your help. I've added all suggested modifications
including tests covering all checker option settings.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27753
___
cfe-commits mailing
gerazo updated this revision to Diff 82336.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27753
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/Checkers.td
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/CMakeLists.txt
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/DirtyScalarChecker.cpp
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/GenericTaintChecker.cpp
test/Ana
gerazo created this revision.
gerazo added reviewers: zaks.anna, dcoughlin.
gerazo added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
Checker for catching tainted value usage without proper bound checking. Uses
GenericTaintChecker which is also in alpha.security.
https://review
28 matches
Mail list logo