aaronpuchert wrote: > I had to revert because it causes Linux kernel build errors (false > positives), so I need to take another look.
Could you provide some details? Was a variable being reused for something else? > In particular, I didn't like that we effectively undid what > testPointerAliasEscapeMultiple() was testing (avoid false negatives for this > case, which @ziqingluo-90 fixed earlier). I actually liked it. If we're doing alias analysis, then for all we know, `F` and `Fp` point to the same thing. This call invalidation will work in some examples and in others it will fail, and I don't think we'll ever get everything right. I think we have to keep this limited and predictable. > And I found real cases in the Linux kernel where there's some reallocation of > an object going on that I _do_ want to catch (or suppress explicitly). We can't catch everything, and especially tracking values or variables is a bit out-of-scope for us. It might be interesting though it the alias analysis is what causes the false negative, i.e. if there would be a warning without it. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/187691 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
