|
Revision tags: llvmorg-18.1.8, llvmorg-18.1.7, llvmorg-18.1.6, llvmorg-18.1.5, llvmorg-18.1.4, llvmorg-18.1.3, llvmorg-18.1.2, llvmorg-18.1.1, llvmorg-18.1.0, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc4, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc3, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc2, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-19-init, llvmorg-17.0.6, llvmorg-17.0.5, llvmorg-17.0.4, llvmorg-17.0.3, llvmorg-17.0.2, llvmorg-17.0.1, llvmorg-17.0.0, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-18-init, llvmorg-16.0.6, llvmorg-16.0.5, llvmorg-16.0.4, llvmorg-16.0.3, llvmorg-16.0.2, llvmorg-16.0.1, llvmorg-16.0.0, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-17-init, llvmorg-15.0.7, llvmorg-15.0.6, llvmorg-15.0.5, llvmorg-15.0.4, llvmorg-15.0.3, working |
|
| #
a504ddc8 |
| 05-Oct-2022 |
Kristóf Umann <dkszelethus@gmail.com> |
[analyzer] Initialize regions returned by CXXNew to undefined
Discourse mail:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/analyzer-why-do-we-suck-at-modeling-c-dynamic-memory/65667
malloc() returns a piece of uni
[analyzer] Initialize regions returned by CXXNew to undefined
Discourse mail:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/analyzer-why-do-we-suck-at-modeling-c-dynamic-memory/65667
malloc() returns a piece of uninitialized dynamic memory. We were (almost)
always able to model this behaviour. Its C++ counterpart, operator new is a
lot more complex, because it allows for initialization, the most complicated of which is the usage of constructors.
We gradually became better in modeling constructors, but for some reason, most
likely for reasons lost in history, we never actually modeled the case when the
memory returned by operator new was just simply uninitialized. This patch
(attempts) to fix this tiny little error.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D135375
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: llvmorg-15.0.2, llvmorg-15.0.1, llvmorg-15.0.0, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-16-init, llvmorg-14.0.6, llvmorg-14.0.5, llvmorg-14.0.4, llvmorg-14.0.3 |
|
| #
68ee5ec0 |
| 27-Apr-2022 |
Marco Antognini <marco.antognini@sonarsource.com> |
[Analyzer] Fix assumptions about const field with member-initializer
Essentially, having a default member initializer for a constant member
does not necessarily imply the member will have the given
[Analyzer] Fix assumptions about const field with member-initializer
Essentially, having a default member initializer for a constant member
does not necessarily imply the member will have the given default value.
Remove part of a2e053638bbf ([analyzer] Treat more const variables and
fields as known contants., 2018-05-04).
Fix #47878
Reviewed By: r.stahl, steakhal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124621
show more ...
|