================
@@ -2866,12 +2877,14 @@ ConditionTruthVal
RangeConstraintManager::checkNull(ProgramStateRef State,
const llvm::APSInt *RangeConstraintManager::getSymVal(ProgramStateRef St,
SymbolRef Sym) const {
- const RangeSet *T = getConstraint(St, Sym);
- return T ? T->getConcreteValue() : nullptr;
+ auto &MutableSelf = const_cast<RangeConstraintManager &>(*this);
+ return MutableSelf.getRange(St, Sym).getConcreteValue();
}
const llvm::APSInt *RangeConstraintManager::getSymMinVal(ProgramStateRef St,
SymbolRef Sym) const {
+ // TODO: Use `getRange()` like in `getSymVal()`, but that would make some
+ // of the reports of `BitwiseShiftChecker` look awkward.
----------------
NagyDonat wrote:
Just wonderful :upside_down_face: :heart:
These awkward messages demonstrate that `getRange()` _knows less_ than
`evalBinOp()`: the code that creates the note calls `getMinValue()` and sees
just `INT_MIN`, but when the actual check is performed with an `evalBinOp`
call, it can prove that the value is actually at least 32.
As a quick workaround for the awkward reports I would be grateful if you
tweaked `BitwiseShiftValidator::checkOvershift()` by extending the conditional
```cpp
if (const llvm::APSInt *MinRight = SVB.getMinValue(FoldedState, Right)) {
LowerBoundStr = formatv(" >= {0},", MinRight->getExtValue());
}
```
with a sanity check that only defines `LowerBoundStr` when `MinRight` is not
smaller than `LHSBitWidth`.
On a longer term it would be nice if `getRange()` and `getMinValue` /
`getMaxValue` would become more accurate and closer to `evalBinOp()`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112583
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
