summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJordan Rose <jordan_rose@apple.com>2013-03-23 01:21:16 +0000
committerJordan Rose <jordan_rose@apple.com>2013-03-23 01:21:16 +0000
commit78114a58f8cf5e9b948e82448b2f0904f5b6c19e (patch)
tree5716f8ce2ad0aecafe09fbcab05c8b4acb39f8d8 /lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp
parent8958efacf8d52918cfe624116338bec62312582d (diff)
downloadclang-78114a58f8cf5e9b948e82448b2f0904f5b6c19e.tar.gz
[analyzer] Translate "a != b" to "(b - a) != 0" in the constraint manager.
Canonicalizing these two forms allows us to better model containers like std::vector, which use "m_start != m_finish" to implement empty() but "m_finish - m_start" to implement size(). The analyzer should have a consistent interpretation of these two symbolic expressions, even though it's not properly reasoning about either one yet. The other unfortunate thing is that while the size() expression will only ever be written "m_finish - m_start", the comparison may be written "m_finish == m_start" or "m_start == m_finish". Right now the analyzer does not attempt to canonicalize those two expressions, since it doesn't know which length expression to pick. Doing this correctly will probably require implementing unary minus as a new SymExpr kind (<rdar://problem/12351075>). For now, the analyzer inverts the order of arguments in the comparison to build the subtraction, on the assumption that "begin() != end()" is written more often than "end() != begin()". This is purely speculation. <rdar://problem/13239003> git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@177801 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp')
-rw-r--r--lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp52
1 files changed, 36 insertions, 16 deletions
diff --git a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp
index de13241cac..86940a1e84 100644
--- a/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp
+++ b/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SimpleConstraintManager.cpp
@@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ bool SimpleConstraintManager::canReasonAbout(SVal X) const {
}
}
+ if (const SymSymExpr *SSE = dyn_cast<SymSymExpr>(SE)) {
+ if (SSE->getOpcode() == BO_EQ || SSE->getOpcode() == BO_NE)
+ return true;
+ }
+
return false;
}
@@ -164,8 +169,6 @@ ProgramStateRef SimpleConstraintManager::assumeAux(ProgramStateRef state,
return assumeAuxForSymbol(state, sym, Assumption);
}
- BasicValueFactory &BasicVals = getBasicVals();
-
switch (Cond.getSubKind()) {
default:
llvm_unreachable("'Assume' not implemented for this NonLoc");
@@ -180,26 +183,43 @@ ProgramStateRef SimpleConstraintManager::assumeAux(ProgramStateRef state,
return assumeAuxForSymbol(state, sym, Assumption);
// Handle symbolic expression.
- } else {
+ } else if (const SymIntExpr *SE = dyn_cast<SymIntExpr>(sym)) {
// We can only simplify expressions whose RHS is an integer.
- const SymIntExpr *SE = dyn_cast<SymIntExpr>(sym);
- if (!SE)
- return assumeAuxForSymbol(state, sym, Assumption);
BinaryOperator::Opcode op = SE->getOpcode();
- // Implicitly compare non-comparison expressions to 0.
- if (!BinaryOperator::isComparisonOp(op)) {
- QualType T = SE->getType();
- const llvm::APSInt &zero = BasicVals.getValue(0, T);
- op = (Assumption ? BO_NE : BO_EQ);
- return assumeSymRel(state, SE, op, zero);
+ if (BinaryOperator::isComparisonOp(op)) {
+ if (!Assumption)
+ op = NegateComparison(op);
+
+ return assumeSymRel(state, SE->getLHS(), op, SE->getRHS());
}
- // From here on out, op is the real comparison we'll be testing.
- if (!Assumption)
- op = NegateComparison(op);
- return assumeSymRel(state, SE->getLHS(), op, SE->getRHS());
+ } else if (const SymSymExpr *SSE = dyn_cast<SymSymExpr>(sym)) {
+ BinaryOperator::Opcode Op = SSE->getOpcode();
+
+ // Translate "a != b" to "(b - a) != 0".
+ // We invert the order of the operands as a heuristic for how loop
+ // conditions are usually written ("begin != end") as compared to length
+ // calculations ("end - begin"). The more correct thing to do would be to
+ // canonicalize "a - b" and "b - a", which would allow us to treat
+ // "a != b" and "b != a" the same.
+ if (BinaryOperator::isEqualityOp(Op)) {
+ SymbolManager &SymMgr = getSymbolManager();
+
+ assert(Loc::isLocType(SSE->getLHS()->getType()));
+ assert(Loc::isLocType(SSE->getRHS()->getType()));
+ QualType DiffTy = SymMgr.getContext().getPointerDiffType();
+ SymbolRef Subtraction = SymMgr.getSymSymExpr(SSE->getRHS(), BO_Sub,
+ SSE->getLHS(), DiffTy);
+
+ Assumption ^= (SSE->getOpcode() == BO_EQ);
+ return assumeAuxForSymbol(state, Subtraction, Assumption);
+ }
}
+
+ // If we get here, there's nothing else we can do but treat the symbol as
+ // opaque.
+ return assumeAuxForSymbol(state, sym, Assumption);
}
case nonloc::ConcreteIntKind: {