================
@@ -202,6 +202,43 @@ class SemaPPCallbacks : public PPCallbacks {
break;
}
}
+ void PragmaDiagnostic(SourceLocation Loc, StringRef Namespace,
+ diag::Severity Mapping, StringRef Str) override {
+ // If one of the analysis-based diagnostics was enabled while processing
+ // a function, we want to note it in the analysis-based warnings so they
+ // can be run at the end of the function body even if the analysis warnings
+ // are disabled at that point.
+ SmallVector<diag::kind, 256> GroupDiags;
+ diag::Flavor Flavor =
+ Str[1] == 'W' ? diag::Flavor::WarningOrError : diag::Flavor::Remark;
+ StringRef Group = Str.substr(2);
+
+ if (S->PP.getDiagnostics().getDiagnosticIDs()->getDiagnosticsInGroup(
+ Flavor, Group, GroupDiags))
+ return;
+
+ for (diag::kind K : GroupDiags) {
+ // Note: the cases in this switch should be kept in sync with the
+ // diagnostics in AnalysisBasedWarnings::getPolicyInEffectAt().
+ AnalysisBasedWarnings::Policy &Override =
+ S->AnalysisWarnings.getPolicyOverrides();
+ switch (K) {
+ default: break;
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
At the moment, yes. As a follow-up, I would wonder if we could auto-generate
this from tablegen.
Though, in this patch, we could perhaps instead of doing this override, have
the policy store a LIST of override diagnostics, that we then check are in the
list. So this would instead of this whole switch do:
`Override.DiagOverrideList.push_back(K);`
That would work for ALL diagnostics, at the expense of a somewhat significant
size increase.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136323
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
