Commit Graph

6 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Balazs Benics 6ca17b58f5 [analyzer] Drop deprecated flags
As proposed in D126215 (ffe7950ebc),
I'm dropping the `-analyzer-store` and
`-analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks` clang frontend flags.
I'm also dropping the corresponding commandline handlers of `scanbuild`.

This behavior is planned to be part of `clang-16`.

Reviewed By: xazax.hun

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132289
2022-08-23 18:39:21 +02:00
Balazs Benics 9da697e1bc Reland "[analyzer] Deprecate the unused 'analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks' cc1 flag"
It was previously reverted by 8406839d19.

---

This flag was introduced by
6818991d71
    commit 6818991d71
    Author: Ted Kremenek <kremenek@apple.com>
    Date:   Mon Dec 7 22:06:12 2009 +0000

  Add clang-cc option '-analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks' to treat
  block literals as an entry point for analyzer checks.

The last reference was removed by this commit:
5c32dfc5fb

    commit 5c32dfc5fb
    Author: Anna Zaks <ganna@apple.com>
    Date:   Fri Dec 21 01:19:15 2012 +0000

  [analyzer] Add blocks and ObjC messages to the call graph.
  This paves the road for constructing a better function dependency graph.
  If we analyze a function before the functions it calls and inlines,
  there is more opportunity for optimization.
  Note, we add call edges to the called methods that correspond to
  function definitions (declarations with bodies).

Consequently, we should remove this dead flag.
However, this arises a couple of burning questions.
 - Should the `cc1` frontend still accept this flag - to keep
   tools/users passing this flag directly to `cc1` (which is unsupported,
   unadvertised) working.
 - If we should remain backward compatible, how long?
 - How can we get rid of deprecated and obsolete flags at some point?

Reviewed By: martong

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126067
2022-06-14 10:22:37 +02:00
Balazs Benics ffe7950ebc Reland "[analyzer] Deprecate `-analyzer-store region` flag"
I'm trying to remove unused options from the `Analyses.def` file, then
merge the rest of the useful options into the `AnalyzerOptions.def`.
Then make sure one can set these by an `-analyzer-config XXX=YYY` style
flag.
Then surface the `-analyzer-config` to the `clang` frontend;

After all of this, we can pursue the tablegen approach described
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-tablegen-clang-static-analyzer-engine-options-for-better-documentation/61488

In this patch, I'm proposing flag deprecations.
We should support deprecated analyzer flags for exactly one release. In
this case I'm planning to drop this flag in `clang-16`.

In the clang frontend, now we won't pass this option to the cc1
frontend, rather emit a warning diagnostic reminding the users about
this deprecated flag, which will be turned into error in clang-16.

Unfortunately, I had to remove all the tests referring to this flag,
causing a mass change. I've also added a test for checking this warning.

I've seen that `scan-build` also uses this flag, but I think we should
remove that part only after we turn this into a hard error.

Reviewed By: martong

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126215
2022-06-14 09:20:41 +02:00
Nico Weber 8406839d19 Revert "[analyzer] Deprecate `-analyzer-store region` flag"
This reverts commit d50d9946d1.
Broke check-clang, see comments on https://reviews.llvm.org/D126067

Also revert dependent change "[analyzer] Deprecate the unused 'analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks' cc1 flag"
This reverts commit 07b4a6d046.

Also revert "[analyzer] Fix buildbots after introducing a new frontend warning"
This reverts commit 90374df15d.
(See https://reviews.llvm.org/rG90374df15ddc58d823ca42326a76f58e748f20eb)
2022-06-10 08:50:13 -04:00
Balazs Benics 07b4a6d046 [analyzer] Deprecate the unused 'analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks' cc1 flag
This flag was introduced by
6818991d71
    commit 6818991d71
    Author: Ted Kremenek <kremenek@apple.com>
    Date:   Mon Dec 7 22:06:12 2009 +0000

  Add clang-cc option '-analyzer-opt-analyze-nested-blocks' to treat
  block literals as an entry point for analyzer checks.

The last reference was removed by this commit:
5c32dfc5fb

    commit 5c32dfc5fb
    Author: Anna Zaks <ganna@apple.com>
    Date:   Fri Dec 21 01:19:15 2012 +0000

  [analyzer] Add blocks and ObjC messages to the call graph.
  This paves the road for constructing a better function dependency graph.
  If we analyze a function before the functions it calls and inlines,
  there is more opportunity for optimization.
  Note, we add call edges to the called methods that correspond to
  function definitions (declarations with bodies).

Consequently, we should remove this dead flag.
However, this arises a couple of burning questions.
 - Should the `cc1` frontend still accept this flag - to keep
   tools/users passing this flag directly to `cc1` (which is unsupported,
   unadvertised) working.
 - If we should remain backward compatible, how long?
 - How can we get rid of deprecated and obsolete flags at some point?

Reviewed By: martong

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126067
2022-06-10 13:09:37 +02:00
Balazs Benics d50d9946d1 [analyzer] Deprecate `-analyzer-store region` flag
I'm trying to remove unused options from the `Analyses.def` file, then
merge the rest of the useful options into the `AnalyzerOptions.def`.
Then make sure one can set these by an `-analyzer-config XXX=YYY` style
flag.
Then surface the `-analyzer-config` to the `clang` frontend;

After all of this, we can pursue the tablegen approach described
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-tablegen-clang-static-analyzer-engine-options-for-better-documentation/61488

In this patch, I'm proposing flag deprecations.
We should support deprecated analyzer flags for exactly one release. In
this case I'm planning to drop this flag in `clang-16`.

In the clang frontend, now we won't pass this option to the cc1
frontend, rather emit a warning diagnostic reminding the users about
this deprecated flag, which will be turned into error in clang-16.

Unfortunately, I had to remove all the tests referring to this flag,
causing a mass change. I've also added a test for checking this warning.

I've seen that `scan-build` also uses this flag, but I think we should
remove that part only after we turn this into a hard error.

Reviewed By: martong

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126215
2022-06-10 12:57:15 +02:00