NoQ accepted this revision.
NoQ added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Hmm this probably even deserves a warning? Like, the mutex goes out of scope
but we don't know whether we've successfully destroyed it? Even if we perform
the check later, we can't do anything about it anymore? (not sure how bad it is
in practice)
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/PthreadLockChecker.cpp:290-304
// Existence in DestroyRetVal ensures existence in LockMap.
// Existence in Destroyed also ensures that the lock state for lockR is
either
// UntouchedAndPossiblyDestroyed or UnlockedAndPossiblyDestroyed.
assert(lstate->isUntouchedAndPossiblyDestroyed() ||
lstate->isUnlockedAndPossiblyDestroyed());
ConstraintManager &CMgr = state->getConstraintManager();
----------------
ASDenysPetrov wrote:
> I'm just wondering, did you think about such way of fixing?
This involves keeping dead regions in the program state. I'd be pretty worried
about it.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98504/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98504
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
