Revert "[analyzer] Toning down invalidation a bit".
This reverts commit r352473.
The overall idea is great, but it seems to cause unintented consequences
when not only Region Store invalidation but also pointer escape mechanism
was accidentally affected.
Based on discussions in https://reviews.llvm.org/D58121#1452483
and https://reviews.llvm.org/D57230#1434161
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57230
llvm-svn: 357620
diff --git a/clang/test/Analysis/call-invalidation.cpp b/clang/test/Analysis/call-invalidation.cpp
index dade8db..c107e10 100644
--- a/clang/test/Analysis/call-invalidation.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/Analysis/call-invalidation.cpp
@@ -132,21 +132,18 @@
PlainStruct s1;
s1.x = 1;
s1.z = 1;
- s1.y = 1;
clang_analyzer_eval(s1.x == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
clang_analyzer_eval(s1.z == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
// Not only passing a structure pointer through const pointer parameter,
// but also passing a field pointer through const pointer parameter
// should preserve the contents of the structure.
useAnythingConst(&(s1.y));
- clang_analyzer_eval(s1.y == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
clang_analyzer_eval(s1.x == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
// FIXME: Should say "UNKNOWN", because it is not uncommon to
// modify a mutable member variable through const pointer.
clang_analyzer_eval(s1.z == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
useAnything(&(s1.y));
- clang_analyzer_eval(s1.x == 1); // expected-warning{{TRUE}}
- clang_analyzer_eval(s1.y == 1); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}
+ clang_analyzer_eval(s1.x == 1); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}
}