[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp:1604-1606 +Handler.handleFunExcludesLock(Cp.getKind(), D->getNameAsString(), + (!Cp).toString(), Loc); +return; aaronpuchert wrote:

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet updated this revision to Diff 557475. courbet marked 2 inline comments as done. courbet added a comment. Address comments CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D153132/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D153132 Files: clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp Index: clang/lib/An

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

aaronpuchert accepted this revision. aaronpuchert added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Got it, so it's because we want to work on a different fact set than what `BuildLockset` holds. Yeah, I think this makes sense. And after all the methods aren't too far away from

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet added a comment. In D153132#4651204 , @courbet wrote: > In D153132#4647557 , @aaronpuchert > wrote: > >> In D153132#4431627 , @courbet >> wrote: >> Is this

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet added a comment. In D153132#4647557 , @aaronpuchert wrote: > In D153132#4431627 , @courbet wrote: > >>> Is this actually required for the subsequent change? I don't see the >>> connection. >> >> In the f

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

aaronpuchert added a comment. In D153132#4431627 , @courbet wrote: >> Is this actually required for the subsequent change? I don't see the >> connection. > > In the followup change, we have to check the returns after the enter and exit > CFG block are c

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet updated this revision to Diff 532534. courbet added a comment. remove type alias Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D153132/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D153132 Files: clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp Index: clang/lib/Anal

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet added a comment. > Is this actually required for the subsequent change? I don't see the > connection. In the followup change, we have to check the returns after the enter and exit CFG block are computed. We can't analyze the returns as they are seen because , because what matters for t

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

aaronpuchert added a comment. Is this actually required for the subsequent change? I don't see the connection. That being said, I haven't spent a lot of thought on what belongs in `ThreadSafetyAnalyzer` and what in `BuildLockset`. Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.c

[PATCH] D153132: [clang analysis][NFCI] Preparatory work for D153131.

courbet created this revision. courbet added a reviewer: delesley. Herald added a reviewer: NoQ. Herald added a project: All. courbet requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: clang. Refactoring in preparation for D153131 Repository: rG LLVM