The existing `Node.asExpr` predicate changes semantics so it becomes the
one that most users should use when they don't want to think about
`Conversion`s. A new `Node.asConvertedExpr` predicate is added and has
the same semantics as the old `Node.asExpr` predicate. It's for advanced
users that know about `Conversion`s and want to account for them.
With this change, the `IRDataflowTestCommon.qll` and
`DataflowTestCommon.qll` files use the same definitions of sources and
sinks. Since the IR data flow library is meant to be compatible with the
AST data flow library, this is what we ought to be testing.
Two alerts change but not necessarily for the right reasons.
As we prepare to clarify how conversions are treated, we don't want a
`sink(...)` declaration where it's non-obvious which conversions are
applied to arguments.
This change suppresses results from "Declaration hides parameter" where
the ParameterDeclarationEntry does not link up to the right
FunctionDeclarationEntry.
Bad magic ended up in `LocalVariable.getFunction` and effectively
created a Cartesian product. Before this change, the timing looked like
this:
Variable::LocalVariable::getFunction_dispred#bb ... 50.1s
#select#cpe#123#fff ............................... 20.6s
After this change, those predicates become much faster:
Variable::LocalVariable::getFunction_dispred#ff ... 121ms
DeclarationHidesParameter::localVariableNames#fff . 77ms
#select#cpe#123#fff ............................... 28ms
Introducing the predicate `localVariableNames` ensures that we can do
the main join on two columns simultaneously, so that's a change we
should keep even if we remove the `pragma[nomagic]` later.
This test was intended to catch regressions in the CFG, but it looks
like it's just catching insignificant extractor changes. The test has
started failing after some recent extractor changes, but I have no way
to pinpoint the failure and understand whether it's a problem or not, so
I think it's better to delete this test.
The remaining tests check whether the QL-based CFG generates the same
graph as the extractor-based CFG. Furthermore, the `successor-tests`
check that the extractor-based CFG works as intended.
This recursive predicate is made faster by working around a known
optimizer problem (QL-796) that causes the optimizer to insert extra
type checks in recursive case even when they are only needed in the
base case.
This reduces the number of bounds computed, and will simplify use of the
library. The resulting locations in the tests may be slightly strange,
because the example `Instruction` for a `ValueNumber` is the first
appearing in the IR, regardless of source order, and may not be the most
closely related `Instruction` to the bounded value. I think that's worth
doing for the performance and usability benefits.
I changed to detect any logical operation usage (i.e. !, ==), but I kept usage in a conditional directly as a separate detection condition. I found no false positives on the projects you shared with me previously.
This implements calculation of the control-flow graph in QL. The new
code is not enabled yet as we'll need more extractor changes first.
The `SyntheticDestructorCalls.qll` file is a temporary solution that can
be removed when the extractor produces this information directly.
