analyzer: eliminate region_model::eval_condition_without_cm [PR101962]

In r12-3094-ge82e0f149b0aba I added the assumption that
POINTER_PLUS_EXPR of non-NULL is non-NULL (for PR analyzer/101962).

Whilst working on another bug, I noticed that this only works
when the LHS is known to be non-NULL via
region_model::eval_condition_without_cm, but not when it's known through
a constraint.

This distinction predates the original commit of the analyzer in GCC 10,
but I believe it became irrelevant in the GCC 11 rewrite of the region
model code (r11-2694-g808f4dfeb3a95f).

Hence this patch eliminates region_model::eval_condition_without_cm in
favor of all users simply calling region_model::eval_condition.  Doing
so enables the "POINTER_PLUS_EXPR of non-NULL is non-NULL" assumption to
also be made when the LHS is known through a constraint (e.g. a
conditional).

gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
	PR analyzer/101962
	* region-model-impl-calls.cc: Update comment.
	* region-model.cc (region_model::check_symbolic_bounds): Fix
	layout of "void" return.  Replace usage of
	eval_condition_without_cm with eval_condition.
	(region_model::eval_condition): Take over body of...
	(region_model::eval_condition_without_cm): ...this subroutine,
	dropping the latter.  Eliminating this distinction avoids issues
	where constraints were not considered when recursing.
	(region_model::compare_initial_and_pointer): Update comment.
	(region_model::symbolic_greater_than): Replace usage of
	eval_condition_without_cm with eval_condition.
	* region-model.h
	(region_model::eval_condition_without_cm): Delete decl.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
	PR analyzer/101962
	* gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-23.c (test_3): New test.

Signed-off-by: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
David Malcolm 2022-11-08 17:49:07 -05:00
parent bbcb84bba0
commit 9bbcee450d
4 changed files with 38 additions and 53 deletions

View file

@ -498,7 +498,7 @@ region_model::impl_call_fread (const call_details &cd)
This has to be done here so that the sm-handling can use the fact
that they point to the same region to establish that they are equal
(in region_model::eval_condition_without_cm), and thus transition
(in region_model::eval_condition), and thus transition
all pointers to the region to the "freed" state together, regardless
of casts. */

View file

@ -1764,12 +1764,13 @@ public:
/* Check whether an access is past the end of the BASE_REG. */
void region_model::check_symbolic_bounds (const region *base_reg,
const svalue *sym_byte_offset,
const svalue *num_bytes_sval,
const svalue *capacity,
enum access_direction dir,
region_model_context *ctxt) const
void
region_model::check_symbolic_bounds (const region *base_reg,
const svalue *sym_byte_offset,
const svalue *num_bytes_sval,
const svalue *capacity,
enum access_direction dir,
region_model_context *ctxt) const
{
gcc_assert (ctxt);
@ -1777,7 +1778,7 @@ void region_model::check_symbolic_bounds (const region *base_reg,
= m_mgr->get_or_create_binop (num_bytes_sval->get_type (), PLUS_EXPR,
sym_byte_offset, num_bytes_sval);
if (eval_condition_without_cm (next_byte, GT_EXPR, capacity).is_true ())
if (eval_condition (next_byte, GT_EXPR, capacity).is_true ())
{
tree diag_arg = get_representative_tree (base_reg);
tree offset_tree = get_representative_tree (sym_byte_offset);
@ -4161,44 +4162,18 @@ tristate
region_model::eval_condition (const svalue *lhs,
enum tree_code op,
const svalue *rhs) const
{
/* For now, make no attempt to capture constraints on floating-point
values. */
if ((lhs->get_type () && FLOAT_TYPE_P (lhs->get_type ()))
|| (rhs->get_type () && FLOAT_TYPE_P (rhs->get_type ())))
return tristate::unknown ();
tristate ts = eval_condition_without_cm (lhs, op, rhs);
if (ts.is_known ())
return ts;
/* Otherwise, try constraints. */
return m_constraints->eval_condition (lhs, op, rhs);
}
/* Determine what is known about the condition "LHS_SVAL OP RHS_SVAL" within
this model, without resorting to the constraint_manager.
This is exposed so that impl_region_model_context::on_state_leak can
check for equality part-way through region_model::purge_unused_svalues
without risking creating new ECs. */
tristate
region_model::eval_condition_without_cm (const svalue *lhs,
enum tree_code op,
const svalue *rhs) const
{
gcc_assert (lhs);
gcc_assert (rhs);
/* See what we know based on the values. */
/* For now, make no attempt to capture constraints on floating-point
values. */
if ((lhs->get_type () && FLOAT_TYPE_P (lhs->get_type ()))
|| (rhs->get_type () && FLOAT_TYPE_P (rhs->get_type ())))
return tristate::unknown ();
/* See what we know based on the values. */
/* Unwrap any unmergeable values. */
lhs = lhs->unwrap_any_unmergeable ();
rhs = rhs->unwrap_any_unmergeable ();
@ -4292,9 +4267,7 @@ region_model::eval_condition_without_cm (const svalue *lhs,
shouldn't warn for. */
if (binop->get_op () == POINTER_PLUS_EXPR)
{
tristate lhs_ts
= eval_condition_without_cm (binop->get_arg0 (),
op, rhs);
tristate lhs_ts = eval_condition (binop->get_arg0 (), op, rhs);
if (lhs_ts.is_known ())
return lhs_ts;
}
@ -4327,7 +4300,7 @@ region_model::eval_condition_without_cm (const svalue *lhs,
}
/* Handle comparisons between two svalues with more than one operand. */
if (const binop_svalue *binop = lhs->dyn_cast_binop_svalue ())
if (const binop_svalue *binop = lhs->dyn_cast_binop_svalue ())
{
switch (op)
{
@ -4369,10 +4342,14 @@ region_model::eval_condition_without_cm (const svalue *lhs,
}
}
return tristate::TS_UNKNOWN;
/* Otherwise, try constraints.
Cast to const to ensure we don't change the constraint_manager as we
do this (e.g. by creating equivalence classes). */
const constraint_manager *constraints = m_constraints;
return constraints->eval_condition (lhs, op, rhs);
}
/* Subroutine of region_model::eval_condition_without_cm, for rejecting
/* Subroutine of region_model::eval_condition, for rejecting
equality of INIT_VAL(PARM) with &LOCAL. */
tristate
@ -4424,18 +4401,18 @@ region_model::symbolic_greater_than (const binop_svalue *bin_a,
/* Eliminate the right-hand side of both svalues. */
if (const binop_svalue *bin_b = dyn_cast <const binop_svalue *> (b))
if (bin_a->get_op () == bin_b->get_op ()
&& eval_condition_without_cm (bin_a->get_arg1 (),
GT_EXPR,
bin_b->get_arg1 ()).is_true ()
&& eval_condition_without_cm (bin_a->get_arg0 (),
GE_EXPR,
bin_b->get_arg0 ()).is_true ())
&& eval_condition (bin_a->get_arg1 (),
GT_EXPR,
bin_b->get_arg1 ()).is_true ()
&& eval_condition (bin_a->get_arg0 (),
GE_EXPR,
bin_b->get_arg0 ()).is_true ())
return tristate (tristate::TS_TRUE);
/* Otherwise, try to remove a positive offset or factor from BIN_A. */
if (is_positive_svalue (bin_a->get_arg1 ())
&& eval_condition_without_cm (bin_a->get_arg0 (),
GE_EXPR, b).is_true ())
&& eval_condition (bin_a->get_arg0 (),
GE_EXPR, b).is_true ())
return tristate (tristate::TS_TRUE);
}
return tristate::unknown ();

View file

@ -450,9 +450,6 @@ class region_model
tristate eval_condition (const svalue *lhs,
enum tree_code op,
const svalue *rhs) const;
tristate eval_condition_without_cm (const svalue *lhs,
enum tree_code op,
const svalue *rhs) const;
tristate compare_initial_and_pointer (const initial_svalue *init,
const region_svalue *ptr) const;
tristate symbolic_greater_than (const binop_svalue *a,

View file

@ -24,3 +24,14 @@ void test_2 (void)
__analyzer_eval (hide (NULL) - 1 == NULL); /* { dg-warning "FALSE" } */
__analyzer_eval (hide (NULL) + 1 == NULL); /* { dg-warning "FALSE" } */
}
void test_3 (void *p)
{
if (!p)
return;
__analyzer_eval (hide (p) == NULL); /* { dg-warning "FALSE" } */
__analyzer_eval (hide (p) + 1 != NULL); /* { dg-warning "TRUE" } */
__analyzer_eval (hide (p) + 1 == NULL); /* { dg-warning "FALSE" } */
__analyzer_eval (hide (p) - 1 != NULL); /* { dg-warning "TRUE" } */
__analyzer_eval (hide (p) - 1 == NULL); /* { dg-warning "FALSE" } */
}