The patch fixes a number of bugs related to parameter indexing in
attributes:
* Parameter indices in some attributes (argument_with_type_tag,
pointer_with_type_tag, nonnull, ownership_takes, ownership_holds,
and ownership_returns) are specified in source as one-origin
including any C++ implicit this parameter, were stored as
zero-origin excluding any this parameter, and were erroneously
printing (-ast-print) and confusingly dumping (-ast-dump) as the
stored values.
* For alloc_size, the C++ implicit this parameter was not subtracted
correctly in Sema, leading to assert failures or to silent failures
of __builtin_object_size to compute a value.
* For argument_with_type_tag, pointer_with_type_tag, and
ownership_returns, the C++ implicit this parameter was not added
back to parameter indices in some diagnostics.
This patch fixes the above bugs and aims to prevent similar bugs in
the future by introducing careful mechanisms for handling parameter
indices in attributes. ParamIdx stores a parameter index and is
designed to hide the stored encoding while providing accessors that
require each use (such as printing) to make explicit the encoding that
is needed. Attribute declarations declare parameter index arguments
as [Variadic]ParamIdxArgument, which are exposed as ParamIdx[*]. This
patch rewrites all attribute arguments that are processed by
checkFunctionOrMethodParameterIndex in SemaDeclAttr.cpp to be declared
as [Variadic]ParamIdxArgument. The only exception is xray_log_args's
argument, which is encoded as a count not an index.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43248
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@326602 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
So I wrote a clang-tidy check to lint out redundant `isa`, `cast`, and
`dyn_cast`s for fun. This is a portion of what it found for clang; I
plan to do similar cleanups in LLVM and other subprojects when I find
time.
Because of the volume of changes, I explicitly avoided making any change
that wasn't highly local and obviously correct to me (e.g. we still have
a number of foo(cast<Bar>(baz)) that I didn't touch, since overloading
is a thing and the cast<Bar> did actually change the type -- just up the
class hierarchy).
I also tried to leave the types we were cast<>ing to somewhere nearby,
in cases where it wasn't locally obvious what we were dealing with
before.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@326416 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The code for going up the macro arg expansion is duplicated in many
places (and we need it for the analyzer as well, so I did not want to
duplicate it two more times).
This patch is an NFC, so the semantics should remain the same.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42458
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@324780 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The 'trivial_abi' attribute can be applied to a C++ class, struct, or
union. It makes special functions of the annotated class (the destructor
and copy/move constructors) to be trivial for the purpose of calls and,
as a result, enables the annotated class or containing classes to be
passed or returned using the C ABI for the underlying type.
When a type that is considered trivial for the purpose of calls despite
having a non-trivial destructor (which happens only when the class type
or one of its subobjects is a 'trivial_abi' class) is passed to a
function, the callee is responsible for destroying the object.
For more background, see the discussions that took place on the mailing
list:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-November/055955.htmlhttp://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20180101/thread.html#214043
rdar://problem/35204524
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41039
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@324269 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The constant is already reduced to 8-bits by the time we get here and the checks were just ensuring that it was 8 bits. Thus I don't think there's anyway for them to fail.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@322244 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Adding the new enumerator forced a bunch more changes into this patch than I
would have liked. The -Wtautological-compare warning was extended to properly
check the new comparison operator, clang-format needed updating because it uses
precedence levels as weights for determining where to break lines (and several
operators increased their precedence levels with this change), thread-safety
analysis needed changes to build its own IL properly for the new operator.
All "real" semantic checking for this operator has been deferred to a future
patch. For now, we use the relational comparison rules and arbitrarily give
the builtin form of the operator a return type of 'void'.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320707 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
and fold together into a single function.
In so doing, fix a handful of remaining bugs where we would report false
positives or false negatives if we promote a signed value to an unsigned type
for the comparison.
This re-commits r320122 and r320124, minus two changes:
* Comparisons between a constant and a non-constant expression of enumeration
type never warn, not even if the constant is out of range. We should be
warning about the creation of such a constant, not about its use.
* We do not use more precise bit-widths for comparisons against bit-fields.
The more precise diagnostics probably are the right thing, but we should
consider moving them under their own warning flag.
Other than the refactoring, this patch should only change the behavior for the
buggy cases (where the warnings didn't take into account that promotion from
signed to unsigned can leave a range of inaccessible values in the middle of
the promoted type).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320211 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
> Unify implementation of our two different flavours of -Wtautological-compare.
>
> In so doing, fix a handful of remaining bugs where we would report false
> positives or false negatives if we promote a signed value to an unsigned type
> for the comparison.
This caused a new warning in Chromium:
../../base/trace_event/trace_log.cc:1545:29: error: comparison of constant 64
with expression of type 'unsigned int' is always true
[-Werror,-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare]
DCHECK(handle.event_index < TraceBufferChunk::kTraceBufferChunkSize);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 'unsigned int' is really a 6-bit bitfield, which is why it's always
less than 64.
I thought we didn't use to warn (with out-of-range-compare) when comparing
against the boundaries of a type?
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320162 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This broke Chromium:
../../base/trace_event/trace_log.cc:1545:29: error: comparison of constant 64
with expression of type 'unsigned int' is always true
[-Werror,-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare]
DCHECK(handle.event_index < TraceBufferChunk::kTraceBufferChunkSize);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 'unsigned int' is really a 6-bit bitfield, which is why it's always
less than 63.
Did this use to fall under the "in-range" case before? I thought we
didn't use to warn when comparing against the boundaries of a type.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320133 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
In so doing, fix a handful of remaining bugs where we would report false
positives or false negatives if we promote a signed value to an unsigned type
for the comparison.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320122 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is a follow up of r302131, in which we forgot to add SemaChecking
tests. Adding these tests revealed two problems which have been fixed:
- added missing intrinsic __qdbl,
- properly range checking ssat16 and usat16.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40888
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320019 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
codepath plus the new "minimum / maximum value of type" diagnostic to get the
same effect.
Move the warning for an in-range but tautological comparison of a constant (0
or 1) against a bool out of -Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare into
the more-appropriate -Wtautological-constant-compare.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@319942 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
An enumeration with a fixed underlying type can have any value in its
underlying type, not just those spanned by the values of its enumerators.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@319875 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
It seems this somehow made -Wempty-body fire in some macro cases where
it didn't before, e.g.
../../third_party/ffmpeg/libavcodec/bitstream.c(169,5): error: if statement has empty body [-Werror,-Wempty-body]
ff_dlog(NULL, "new table index=%d size=%d\n", table_index, table_size);
^
../../third_party/ffmpeg\libavutil/internal.h(276,80): note: expanded from macro 'ff_dlog'
# define ff_dlog(ctx, ...) do { if (0) av_log(ctx, AV_LOG_DEBUG, __VA_ARGS__); } while (0)
^
../../third_party/ffmpeg/libavcodec/bitstream.c(169,5): note: put the
semicolon on a separate line to silence this warning
Reverting until this can be figured out.
> Do not show it when `if` or `else` come from macros.
> E.g.,
>
> #define USED(A) if (A); else
> #define SOME_IF(A) if (A)
>
> void test() {
> // No warnings are shown in those cases now.
> USED(0);
> SOME_IF(0);
> }
>
> Patch by Ilya Biryukov!
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40185
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@318665 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Do not show it when `if` or `else` come from macros.
E.g.,
#define USED(A) if (A); else
#define SOME_IF(A) if (A)
void test() {
// No warnings are shown in those cases now.
USED(0);
SOME_IF(0);
}
Patch by Ilya Biryukov!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40185
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@318556 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This ensures that only immediates that fit in 8-bits are used. This matches what we do for the unmasked versions.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@317664 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
As Mattias Eriksson has reported in PR35009, in C, for enums, the underlying type should
be used when checking for the tautological comparison, unlike C++, where the enumerator
values define the value range. So if not in CPlusPlus mode, use the enum underlying type.
Also, i have discovered a problem (a crash) when evaluating tautological-ness of the following comparison:
```
enum A { A_a = 0 };
if (a < 0) // expected-warning {{comparison of unsigned enum expression < 0 is always false}}
return 0;
```
This affects both the C and C++, but after the first fix, only C++ code was affected.
That was also fixed, while preserving (i think?) the proper diagnostic output.
And while there, attempt to enhance the test coverage.
Yes, some tests got moved around, sorry about that :)
Fixes PR35009
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, rsmith, rjmccall
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: Rakete1111, efriedma, materi, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39122
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@316268 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Use the new helper methods to get the underlying type for NSUInteger,
NSInteger types. This avoids spreading the knowledge of the underlying
types in various sites. For non-LLP64 targets, this has no change.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@316013 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The first attempt, rL315614 was reverted because one libcxx
test broke, and i did not know at the time how to deal with it.
Summary:
Currently, clang only diagnoses completely out-of-range comparisons (e.g. `char` and constant `300`),
and comparisons of unsigned and `0`. But gcc also does diagnose the comparisons with the
`std::numeric_limits<>::max()` / `std::numeric_limits<>::min()` so to speak
Finally Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34147
Continuation of https://reviews.llvm.org/D37565
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: rtrieu, jroelofs, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38101
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@315875 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
Convert clang::LangAS to a strongly typed enum
Currently both clang AST address spaces and target specific address spaces
are represented as unsigned which can lead to subtle errors if the wrong
type is passed. It is especially confusing in the CodeGen files as it is
not possible to see what kind of address space should be passed to a
function without looking at the implementation.
I originally made this change for our LLVM fork for the CHERI architecture
where we make extensive use of address spaces to differentiate between
capabilities and pointers. When merging the upstream changes I usually
run into some test failures or runtime crashes because the wrong kind of
address space is passed to a function. By converting the LangAS enum to a
C++11 we can catch these errors at compile time. Additionally, it is now
obvious from the function signature which kind of address space it expects.
I found the following errors while writing this patch:
- ItaniumRecordLayoutBuilder::LayoutField was passing a clang AST address
space to TargetInfo::getPointer{Width,Align}()
- TypePrinter::printAttributedAfter() prints the numeric value of the
clang AST address space instead of the target address space.
However, this code is not used so I kept the current behaviour
- initializeForBlockHeader() in CGBlocks.cpp was passing
LangAS::opencl_generic to TargetInfo::getPointer{Width,Align}()
- CodeGenFunction::EmitBlockLiteral() was passing a AST address space to
TargetInfo::getPointerWidth()
- CGOpenMPRuntimeNVPTX::translateParameter() passed a target address space
to Qualifiers::addAddressSpace()
- CGOpenMPRuntimeNVPTX::getParameterAddress() was using
llvm::Type::getPointerTo() with a AST address space
- clang_getAddressSpace() returns either a LangAS or a target address
space. As this is exposed to C I have kept the current behaviour and
added a comment stating that it is probably not correct.
Other than this the patch should not cause any functional changes.
Reviewers: yaxunl, pcc, bader
Reviewed By: yaxunl, bader
Subscribers: jlebar, jholewinski, nhaehnle, Anastasia, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38816
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@315871 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Currently Clang uses default address space (0) to represent private address space for OpenCL
in AST. There are two issues with this:
Multiple address spaces including private address space cannot be diagnosed.
There is no mangling for default address space. For example, if private int* is emitted as
i32 addrspace(5)* in IR. It is supposed to be mangled as PUAS5i but it is mangled as
Pi instead.
This patch attempts to represent OpenCL private address space explicitly in AST. It adds
a new enum LangAS::opencl_private and adds it to the variable types which are implicitly
private:
automatic variables without address space qualifier
function parameter
pointee type without address space qualifier (OpenCL 1.2 and below)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35082
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@315668 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
Currently, clang only diagnoses completely out-of-range comparisons (e.g. `char` and constant `300`),
and comparisons of unsigned and `0`. But gcc also does diagnose the comparisons with the
`std::numeric_limits<>::max()` / `std::numeric_limits<>::min()` so to speak
Finally Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34147
Continuation of https://reviews.llvm.org/D37565
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: rtrieu, jroelofs, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38101
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@315614 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This function is used to perform semantic analysis on Microsoft style
`__va_start`. Rename it to make this more explicit. `__va_start` is
marked as `ALL_MS_LANGUAGES`, and requires Microsoft compatibility.
Other GNU targets will use `__builtin_va_start` instead. NFC.
Addresses post-commit review comments from David Majnemer.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@314241 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The `__va_start` intrinsic for Windows ARM does not account for const
correctness when performing a check. All local qualifiers are ignored
when validating the invocation. This was exposed by building the swift
stdlib against the Windows 10586 SDK for ARM. Simply expand out the
check for the two parameters and ignore the qualifiers for the check.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@314226 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
As Aaron Ballman has pointed out, that is not really correct.
So the key problem there is the invalidity of the testcase.
Revert r313747, and rework testcase in such a way, so these
details (platform-specific default enum sigdness) are
accounted for.
Also, add a C++-specific testcase.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@313756 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Hopefully fixes test-clang-msc-x64-on-i686-linux-RA build.
The underlying problem is that the enum is signed there.
Yet still, it is invalid for it to contain negative values,
so the comparison is always tautological in this case.
No differential, but related to https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@313747 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Recommit. Original commit was reverted because buildbots broke.
The error was only reproducible in the build with assertions.
The problem was that the diagnostic expected true/false as
bool, while it was provided as string "true"/"false".
Summary:
As requested by Sam McCall:
> Enums (not new I guess). Typical case: if (enum < 0 || enum > MAX)
> The warning strongly suggests that the enum < 0 check has no effect
> (for enums with nonnegative ranges).
> Clang doesn't seem to optimize such checks out though, and they seem
> likely to catch bugs in some cases. Yes, only if there's UB elsewhere,
> but I assume not optimizing out these checks indicates a deliberate
> decision to stay somewhat compatible with a technically-incorrect
> mental model.
> If this is the case, should we move these to a
> -Wtautological-compare-enum subcategory?
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, aaron.ballman, sammccall, bkramer, djasper
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: jroelofs, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@313745 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
As requested by Sam McCall:
> Enums (not new I guess). Typical case: if (enum < 0 || enum > MAX)
> The warning strongly suggests that the enum < 0 check has no effect
> (for enums with nonnegative ranges).
> Clang doesn't seem to optimize such checks out though, and they seem
> likely to catch bugs in some cases. Yes, only if there's UB elsewhere,
> but I assume not optimizing out these checks indicates a deliberate
> decision to stay somewhat compatible with a technically-incorrect
> mental model.
> If this is the case, should we move these to a
> -Wtautological-compare-enum subcategory?
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, aaron.ballman, sammccall, bkramer, djasper
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: jroelofs, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@313677 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
This is a first half(?) of a fix for the following bug:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34147 (gcc -Wtype-limits)
GCC's -Wtype-limits does warn on comparison of unsigned value
with signed zero (as in, with 0), but clang only warns if the
zero is unsigned (i.e. 0U).
Also, be careful not to double-warn, or falsely warn on
comparison of signed/fp variable and signed 0.
Yes, all these testcases are needed.
Testing: $ ninja check-clang-sema check-clang-semacxx
Also, no new warnings for clang stage-2 build.
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rjmccall
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37565
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@312750 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Nico Weber