aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/cert/SignalHandlerCheck.cpp:117-118
+ FunctionCallCollector Collector{[&CalledFunctions](const CallExpr *CE) {
+ if (isa<FunctionDecl>(CE->getCalleeDecl()))
+ CalledFunctions.push_back(CE);
+ }};
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> balazske wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > For correctness, I think you need to handle more than just calls to
> > > function declarations -- for instance, this should be just as problematic:
> > > ```
> > > void some_signal_handler(int sig) {
> > > []{ puts("this should not be an escape hatch for the check); }();
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > even though the call expression in the signal handler doesn't resolve
> > > back to a function declaration. (Similar for blocks instead of lambdas.)
> > > WDYT?
> > I do not know how many other cases could be there. Probably this can be
> > left for future improvement, the checker is mainly usable for C code then.
> > There is a `clang::CallGraph` functionality that could be used instead of
> > `FunctionCallCollector` but the `CallExpr` for the calls is not provided by
> > it so it does not work for this case. Maybe there is other similar
> > functionality that is usable?
> Given that we want it in the CERT module, we should try to ensure it follows
> the rule as closely as we can. I went and checked what the C++ rules say
> about this and... it was interesting to notice that SIG30-C is not one of the
> C rules included by reference in C++
> (https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=88046336).
>
> It's not clear to me that this rule was accidentally tagged as `not-for-cpp`
> or not, so I'd say it's fine to ignore lambdas for the moment but we may have
> some follow-up work if CERT changes the rule to be included in C++. My
> recommendation is: make the check a C-only check for now, document it as
> such, and I'll ping the folks at CERT to see if this rule was mistagged or
> not. WDYT?
Ah, this rule really is a C-only rule, because
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/cplusplus/MSC54-CPP.+A+signal+handler+must+be+a+plain+old+function
is the C++ rule. So I think the SIG30-C checker should be run in C-only mode
and we can ignore the C++isms in it.
FWIW, we have an ongoing discussion about MSC54-CPP in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33825.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D87449/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D87449
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
