Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Impose recursion limit on indirect calls.

[ Sorry for very late response ] > On 27-Aug-2021, at 6:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > > On 8/27/21 14:44, Ankur Saini wrote: >> While working on patch to convert most of the 8 whitespace characters to >> tabs in the analyzer’s source, I see this weird behaviour where at some >> places indentati

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Impose recursion limit on indirect calls.

While working on patch to convert most of the 8 whitespace characters to tabs in the analyzer’s source, I see this weird behaviour where at some places indentation looks weird when viewed in patch file ( generated via “git format-patch” ) but looks alright when viewed in text editor. Here is

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Impose recursion limit on indirect calls.

> On 25-Aug-2021, at 8:35 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 20:31 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote: >> >> >>> On 25-Aug-2021, at 7:24 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> >>> On 8/25/21 15:22, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote: On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 13:39 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote: >

[PATCH] analyzer: Impose recursion limit on indirect calls.

This should also fix the failing regression found in PR analyzer/101980. - The patch is in sync with current master - successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. fix.patch Description: Binary data Thanks - Ankur

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Fix PR analyzer/101980

> On 23-Aug-2021, at 5:00 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > > On 8/23/21 13:04, Ankur Saini wrote: >>> On 23-Aug-2021, at 2:20 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> >>> On 8/23/21 10:10, Martin Liška wrote: On 8/20/21 18:47, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 21:55 +0530, An

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Fix PR analyzer/101980

update looks like the problem was with test itself, apparently Deja is quite strict when it comes to spaces and didn’t read the “dg-“ directive on line 72 as there wasn’t an extra space between the statement and the closing brace. Adding it seems to fix the issue - - - diff --git a/gcc/tes

Re: [PATCH] analyzer: Fix PR analyzer/101980

> On 23-Aug-2021, at 2:20 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > > On 8/23/21 10:10, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 8/20/21 18:47, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote: >>> On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 21:55 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote: The patch fixes the test failures introduced by : aef703cf982072427e74

Re: [PATCH 1/2] analyzer: detect and analyze calls via function pointer (GSoC)

Here is the final patch after fixing all the nits mentioned. Successfully bootstrapped and completed regress tests on x86_64-linux-gnu. - - - vfunc.patch Description: Binary data Thanks - Ankur

Re: [PATCH 1/2] analyzer: detect and analyze calls via function pointer (GSoC)

Thanks for the review > On 16-Aug-2021, at 4:48 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > > Thanks, this is looking promising. Has this been rebased recently > (e.g. since I merged > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-August/576737.html ) Yes, The branch is totally up to date with master at the

[PATCH 1/2] analyzer: detect and analyze calls via function pointer (GSoC)

The patch extends the analyser’s functionality to understand and analyze indirect calls (calls via a function pointer or calls to virtual functions ) On successful merging, the patch should also fix the following bugs :- 1. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100546 2. https://gcc.gnu

Re: [PATCH] Analyzer: Refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes.

Here is the latest patch after fixing all the nit picks and issues pointed out by everyone. call_string.patch Description: Binary data Thanks you - Ankur

Re: [PATCH] Analyzer: Refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes.

> On 25-Jul-2021, at 7:59 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni > wrote: > > !(*this == other) Thanks for the suggestion. Here is the updated patch. Thank you - Ankur

Re: [PATCH] Analyzer: Refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes.

Here is the new patch after fixing all the issues pointed out in the previous version. call_string.patch Description: Binary data — Question : 1. The mail id I am using here to send the patch ( arsenic.second...@gmail.com ) and the mail id in the patch ( arse...@sourceware.org ) are differ

[PATCH] Analyzer: Refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes.

The patch generalises how analyzer's call_string tracks function calls, including the calls that doesn’t have an underlying call graph edge, making it possible to work with function calls which are not discovered by GCC's middle end. Successfully bootstrapped and completed regress tests on x86_

[PATCH] Analyzer: Refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes.

2021-07-12 Ankur Saini gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog: * call-string.cc (call_string::element_t::operator==): New operator. (call_String::element_t::operator!=): New operator. (call_string::element_t::get_caller_function): New function. (call_string::element_t::get_calle

[PATCH 1/2] analyzer: refactor callstring to work with pairs of supernodes [GSoC]

2021-07-3 Ankur Saini * gcc/analyzer/call-string.cc: refactor callstring to work with pair of supernodes instead of super superedges * gcc/analyzer/call-string.h: make callstring work with pairs of supernodes * gcc/analyzer/program-point.cc: refactor program point to w

[Patch]MAINTAINERS - Add myself for write after approval

Hi, I added myself to the MAINTAINERS file under Write After Approval Thanks - Ankur === 2021-07-01 Ankur Saini * MAINTAINERS: Add myself for write after approval. --- diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 468d83f708e..4d6ac9c5765 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b