llvm-project/clang/test/Analysis/symbol-simplification-nonloc-loc.cpp
Balazs Benics a6816b957d [analyzer][solver] Fix assertion on (NonLoc, Op, Loc) expressions
Previously, the `SValBuilder` could not encounter expressions of the
following kind:

  NonLoc OP Loc
  Loc OP NonLoc

Where the `Op` is other than `BO_Add`.

As of now, due to the smarter simplification and the fixedpoint
iteration, it turns out we can.
It can happen if the `Loc` was perfectly constrained to a concrete
value (`nonloc::ConcreteInt`), thus the simplifier can do
constant-folding in these cases as well.

Unfortunately, this could cause assertion failures, since we assumed
that the operator must be `BO_Add`, causing a crash.

---

In the patch, I decided to preserve the original behavior (aka. swap the
operands (if the operator is commutative), but if the `RHS` was a
`loc::ConcreteInt` call `evalBinOpNN()`.

I think this interpretation of the arithmetic expression is closer to
reality.

I also tried naively introducing a separate handler for
`loc::ConcreteInt` RHS, before doing handling the more generic `Loc` RHS
case. However, it broke the `zoo1backwards()` test in the `nullptr.cpp`
file. This highlighted for me the importance to preserve the original
behavior for the `BO_Add` at least.

PS: Sorry for introducing yet another branch into this `evalBinOpXX`
madness. I've got a couple of ideas about refactoring these.
We'll see if I can get to it.

The test file demonstrates the issue and makes sure nothing similar
happens. The `no-crash` annotated lines show, where we crashed before
applying this patch.

Reviewed By: martong

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115149
2021-12-06 18:38:58 +01:00

78 lines
2.3 KiB
C++

// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core %s \
// RUN: -triple x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -verify
#define BINOP(OP) [](auto x, auto y) { return x OP y; }
template <typename BinOp>
void nonloc_OP_loc(int *p, BinOp op) {
long p_as_integer = (long)p;
if (op(12, p_as_integer) != 11)
return;
// Perfectly constrain 'p', thus 'p_as_integer', and trigger a simplification
// of the previously recorded constraint.
if (p) {
// no-crash
}
if (p == (int *)0x404) {
// no-crash
}
}
// Same as before, but the operands are swapped.
template <typename BinOp>
void loc_OP_nonloc(int *p, BinOp op) {
long p_as_integer = (long)p;
if (op(p_as_integer, 12) != 11)
return;
if (p) {
// no-crash
}
if (p == (int *)0x404) {
// no-crash
}
}
void instantiate_tests_for_nonloc_OP_loc(int *p) {
// Multiplicative and additive operators:
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(*));
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(/)); // no-crash
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(%)); // no-crash
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(+));
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(-)); // no-crash
// Bitwise operators:
// expected-warning@+2 {{The result of the left shift is undefined due to shifting by '1028', which is greater or equal to the width of type 'int' [core.UndefinedBinaryOperatorResult]}}
// expected-warning@+2 {{The result of the right shift is undefined due to shifting by '1028', which is greater or equal to the width of type 'int' [core.UndefinedBinaryOperatorResult]}}
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(<<)); // no-crash
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(>>)); // no-crash
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(&));
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(^));
nonloc_OP_loc(p, BINOP(|));
}
void instantiate_tests_for_loc_OP_nonloc(int *p) {
// Multiplicative and additive operators:
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(*));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(/));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(%));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(+));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(-));
// Bitwise operators:
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(<<));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(>>));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(&));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(^));
loc_OP_nonloc(p, BINOP(|));
}
// from: nullptr.cpp
void zoo1backwards() {
char **p = nullptr;
// expected-warning@+1 {{Dereference of null pointer [core.NullDereference]}}
*(0 + p) = nullptr; // warn
**(0 + p) = 'a'; // no-warning: this should be unreachable
}