@c Copyright (C) 2019 Free Software Foundation, Inc. @c This is part of the GCC manual. @c For copying conditions, see the file gcc.texi. @c Contributed by David Malcolm . @node Static Analyzer @chapter Static Analyzer @cindex analyzer @cindex static analysis @cindex static analyzer @menu * Analyzer Internals:: Analyzer Internals * Debugging the Analyzer:: Useful debugging tips @end menu @node Analyzer Internals @section Analyzer Internals @cindex analyzer, internals @cindex static analyzer, internals @subsection Overview The analyzer implementation works on the gimple-SSA representation. (I chose this in the hopes of making it easy to work with LTO to do whole-program analysis). The implementation is read-only: it doesn't attempt to change anything, just emit warnings. The gimple representation can be seen using @option{-fdump-ipa-analyzer}. First, we build a @code{supergraph} which combines the callgraph and all of the CFGs into a single directed graph, with both interprocedural and intraprocedural edges. The nodes and edges in the supergraph are called ``supernodes'' and ``superedges'', and often referred to in code as @code{snodes} and @code{sedges}. Basic blocks in the CFGs are split at interprocedural calls, so there can be more than one supernode per basic block. Most statements will be in just one supernode, but a call statement can appear in two supernodes: at the end of one for the call, and again at the start of another for the return. The supergraph can be seen using @option{-fdump-analyzer-supergraph}. We then build an @code{analysis_plan} which walks the callgraph to determine which calls might be suitable for being summarized (rather than fully explored) and thus in what order to explore the functions. Next is the heart of the analyzer: we use a worklist to explore state within the supergraph, building an "exploded graph". Nodes in the exploded graph correspond to pairs, as in "Precise Interprocedural Dataflow Analysis via Graph Reachability" (Thomas Reps, Susan Horwitz and Mooly Sagiv). We reuse nodes for pairs we've already seen, and avoid tracking state too closely, so that (hopefully) we rapidly converge on a final exploded graph, and terminate the analysis. We also bail out if the number of exploded nodes gets larger than a particular multiple of the total number of basic blocks (to ensure termination in the face of pathological state-explosion cases, or bugs). We also stop exploring a point once we hit a limit of states for that point. We can identify problems directly when processing a instance. For example, if we're finding the successors of @smallexample @end smallexample then we can detect a double-free of "ptr". We can then emit a path to reach the problem by finding the simplest route through the graph. Program points in the analysis are much more fine-grained than in the CFG and supergraph, with points (and thus potentially exploded nodes) for various events, including before individual statements. By default the exploded graph merges multiple consecutive statements in a supernode into one exploded edge to minimize the size of the exploded graph. This can be suppressed via @option{-fanalyzer-fine-grained}. The fine-grained approach seems to make things simpler and more debuggable that other approaches I tried, in that each point is responsible for one thing. Program points in the analysis also have a "call string" identifying the stack of callsites below them, so that paths in the exploded graph correspond to interprocedurally valid paths: we always return to the correct call site, propagating state information accordingly. We avoid infinite recursion by stopping the analysis if a callsite appears more than @code{analyzer-max-recursion-depth} in a callstring (defaulting to 2). @subsection Graphs Nodes and edges in the exploded graph are called ``exploded nodes'' and ``exploded edges'' and often referred to in the code as @code{enodes} and @code{eedges} (especially when distinguishing them from the @code{snodes} and @code{sedges} in the supergraph). Each graph numbers its nodes, giving unique identifiers - supernodes are referred to throughout dumps in the form @samp{SN': @var{index}} and exploded nodes in the form @samp{EN: @var{index}} (e.g. @samp{SN: 2} and @samp{EN:29}). The supergraph can be seen using @option{-fdump-analyzer-supergraph-graph}. The exploded graph can be seen using @option{-fdump-analyzer-exploded-graph} and other dump options. Exploded nodes are color-coded in the .dot output based on state-machine states to make it easier to see state changes at a glance. @subsection State Tracking There's a tension between: @itemize @bullet @item precision of analysis in the straight-line case, vs @item exponential blow-up in the face of control flow. @end itemize For example, in general, given this CFG: @smallexample A / \ B C \ / D / \ E F \ / G @end smallexample we want to avoid differences in state-tracking in B and C from leading to blow-up. If we don't prevent state blowup, we end up with exponential growth of the exploded graph like this: @smallexample 1:A / \ / \ / \ 2:B 3:C | | 4:D 5:D (2 exploded nodes for D) / \ / \ 6:E 7:F 8:E 9:F | | | | 10:G 11:G 12:G 13:G (4 exploded nodes for G) @end smallexample Similar issues arise with loops. To prevent this, we follow various approaches: @enumerate a @item state pruning: which tries to discard state that won't be relevant later on withing the function. This can be disabled via @option{-fno-analyzer-state-purge}. @item state merging. We can try to find the commonality between two program_state instances to make a third, simpler program_state. We have two strategies here: @enumerate @item the worklist keeps new nodes for the same program_point together, and tries to merge them before processing, and thus before they have successors. Hence, in the above, the two nodes for D (4 and 5) reach the front of the worklist together, and we create a node for D with the merger of the incoming states. @item try merging with the state of existing enodes for the program_point (which may have already been explored). There will be duplication, but only one set of duplication; subsequent duplicates are more likely to hit the cache. In particular, (hopefully) all merger chains are finite, and so we guarantee termination. This is intended to help with loops: we ought to explore the first iteration, and then have a "subsequent iterations" exploration, which uses a state merged from that of the first, to be more abstract. @end enumerate We avoid merging pairs of states that have state-machine differences, as these are the kinds of differences that are likely to be most interesting. So, for example, given: @smallexample if (condition) ptr = malloc (size); else ptr = local_buf; .... do things with 'ptr' if (condition) free (ptr); ...etc @end smallexample then we end up with an exploded graph that looks like this: @smallexample if (condition) / T \ F --------- ---------- / \ ptr = malloc (size) ptr = local_buf | | copy of copy of "do things with 'ptr'" "do things with 'ptr'" with ptr: heap-allocated with ptr: stack-allocated | | if (condition) if (condition) | known to be T | known to be F free (ptr); | \ / ----------------------------- | ('ptr' is pruned, so states can be merged) etc @end smallexample where some duplication has occurred, but only for the places where the the different paths are worth exploringly separately. Merging can be disabled via @option{-fno-analyzer-state-merge}. @end enumerate @subsection Region Model Part of the state stored at a @code{exploded_node} is a @code{region_model}. This is an implementation of the region-based ternary model described in @url{http://lcs.ios.ac.cn/~xuzb/canalyze/memmodel.pdf, "A Memory Model for Static Analysis of C Programs"} (Zhongxing Xu, Ted Kremenek, and Jian Zhang). A @code{region_model} encapsulates a representation of the state of memory, with a tree of @code{region} instances, along with their associated values. The representation is graph-like because values can be pointers to regions. It also stores a constraint_manager, capturing relationships between the values. Because each node in the @code{exploded_graph} has a @code{region_model}, and each of the latter is graph-like, the @code{exploded_graph} is in some ways a graph of graphs. Here's an example of printing a @code{region_model}, showing the ASCII-art used to visualize the region hierarchy (colorized when printing to stderr): @smallexample (gdb) call debug (*this) r0: @{kind: 'root', parent: null, sval: null@} |-stack: r1: @{kind: 'stack', parent: r0, sval: sv1@} | |: sval: sv1: @{poisoned: uninit@} | |-frame for 'test': r2: @{kind: 'frame', parent: r1, sval: null, map: @{'ptr_3': r3@}, function: 'test', depth: 0@} | | `-'ptr_3': r3: @{kind: 'map', parent: r2, sval: sv3, type: 'void *', map: @{@}@} | | |: sval: sv3: @{type: 'void *', unknown@} | | |: type: 'void *' | `-frame for 'calls_malloc': r4: @{kind: 'frame', parent: r1, sval: null, map: @{'result_3': r7, '_4': r8, '': r5@}, function: 'calls_malloc', depth: 1@} | |-'': r5: @{kind: 'map', parent: r4, sval: sv4, type: 'void *', map: @{@}@} | | |: sval: sv4: @{type: 'void *', &r6@} | | |: type: 'void *' | |-'result_3': r7: @{kind: 'map', parent: r4, sval: sv4, type: 'void *', map: @{@}@} | | |: sval: sv4: @{type: 'void *', &r6@} | | |: type: 'void *' | `-'_4': r8: @{kind: 'map', parent: r4, sval: sv4, type: 'void *', map: @{@}@} | |: sval: sv4: @{type: 'void *', &r6@} | |: type: 'void *' `-heap: r9: @{kind: 'heap', parent: r0, sval: sv2@} |: sval: sv2: @{poisoned: uninit@} `-r6: @{kind: 'symbolic', parent: r9, sval: null, map: @{@}@} svalues: sv0: @{type: 'size_t', '1024'@} sv1: @{poisoned: uninit@} sv2: @{poisoned: uninit@} sv3: @{type: 'void *', unknown@} sv4: @{type: 'void *', &r6@} constraint manager: equiv classes: ec0: @{sv0 == '1024'@} ec1: @{sv4@} constraints: @end smallexample This is the state at the point of returning from @code{calls_malloc} back to @code{test} in the following: @smallexample void * calls_malloc (void) @{ void *result = malloc (1024); return result; @} void test (void) @{ void *ptr = calls_malloc (); /* etc. */ @} @end smallexample The ``root'' region (``r0'') has a ``stack'' child (``r1''), with two children: a frame for @code{test} (``r2''), and a frame for @code{calls_malloc} (``r4''). These frame regions have child regions for storing their local variables. For example, the return region and that of various other regions within the ``calls_malloc'' frame all have value ``sv4'', a pointer to a heap-allocated region ``r6''. Within the parent frame, @code{ptr_3} has value ``sv3'', an unknown @code{void *}. @subsection Analyzer Paths We need to explain to the user what the problem is, and to persuade them that there really is a problem. Hence having a @code{diagnostic_path} isn't just an incidental detail of the analyzer; it's required. Paths ought to be: @itemize @bullet @item interprocedurally-valid @item feasible @end itemize Without state-merging, all paths in the exploded graph are feasible (in terms of constraints being satisified). With state-merging, paths in the exploded graph can be infeasible. We collate warnings and only emit them for the simplest path e.g. for a bug in a utility function, with lots of routes to calling it, we only emit the simplest path (which could be intraprocedural, if it can be reproduced without a caller). We apply a check that each duplicate warning's shortest path is feasible, rejecting any warnings for which the shortest path is infeasible (which could lead to false negatives). We use the shortest feasible @code{exploded_path} through the @code{exploded_graph} (a list of @code{exploded_edge *}) to build a @code{diagnostic_path} (a list of events for the diagnostic subsystem) - specifically a @code{checker_path}. Having built the @code{checker_path}, we prune it to try to eliminate events that aren't relevant, to minimize how much the user has to read. After pruning, we notify each event in the path of its ID and record the IDs of interesting events, allowing for events to refer to other events in their descriptions. The @code{pending_diagnostic} class has various vfuncs to support emitting more precise descriptions, so that e.g. @itemize @bullet @item a deref-of-unchecked-malloc diagnostic might use: @smallexample returning possibly-NULL pointer to 'make_obj' from 'allocator' @end smallexample for a @code{return_event} to make it clearer how the unchecked value moves from callee back to caller @item a double-free diagnostic might use: @smallexample second 'free' here; first 'free' was at (3) @end smallexample and a use-after-free might use @smallexample use after 'free' here; memory was freed at (2) @end smallexample @end itemize At this point we can emit the diagnostic. @subsection Limitations @itemize @bullet @item Only for C so far @item The implementation of call summaries is currently very simplistic. @item Lack of function pointer analysis @item The constraint-handling code assumes reflexivity in some places (that values are equal to themselves), which is not the case for NaN. As a simple workaround, constraints on floating-point values are currently ignored. @item The region model code creates lots of little mutable objects at each @code{region_model} (and thus per @code{exploded_node}) rather than sharing immutable objects and having the mutable state in the @code{program_state} or @code{region_model}. The latter approach might be more efficient, and might avoid dealing with IDs rather than pointers (which requires us to impose an ordering to get meaningful equality). @item The region model code doesn't yet support @code{memcpy}. At the gimple-ssa level these have been optimized to statements like this: @smallexample _10 = MEM [(char * @{ref-all@})&c] MEM [(char * @{ref-all@})&d] = _10; @end smallexample Perhaps they could be supported via a new @code{compound_svalue} type. @item There are various other limitations in the region model (grep for TODO/xfail in the testsuite). @item The constraint_manager's implementation of transitivity is currently too expensive to enable by default and so must be manually enabled via @option{-fanalyzer-transitivity}). @item The checkers are currently hardcoded and don't allow for user extensibility (e.g. adding allocate/release pairs). @item Although the analyzer's test suite has a proof-of-concept test case for LTO, LTO support hasn't had extensive testing. There are various lang-specific things in the analyzer that assume C rather than LTO. For example, SSA names are printed to the user in ``raw'' form, rather than printing the underlying variable name. @end itemize Some ideas for other checkers @itemize @bullet @item File-descriptor-based APIs @item Linux kernel internal APIs @item Signal handling @end itemize @node Debugging the Analyzer @section Debugging the Analyzer @cindex analyzer, debugging @cindex static analyzer, debugging @subsection Special Functions for Debugging the Analyzer The analyzer recognizes various special functions by name, for use in debugging the analyzer. Declarations can be seen in the testsuite in @file{analyzer-decls.h}. None of these functions are actually implemented. Add: @smallexample __analyzer_break (); @end smallexample to the source being analyzed to trigger a breakpoint in the analyzer when that source is reached. By putting a series of these in the source, it's much easier to effectively step through the program state as it's analyzed. @smallexample __analyzer_dump (); @end smallexample will dump the copious information about the analyzer's state each time it reaches the call in its traversal of the source. @smallexample __analyzer_dump_path (); @end smallexample will emit a placeholder ``note'' diagnostic with a path to that call site, if the analyzer finds a feasible path to it. The builtin @code{__analyzer_dump_exploded_nodes} will emit a warning after analysis containing information on all of the exploded nodes at that program point: @smallexample __analyzer_dump_exploded_nodes (0); @end smallexample will output the number of ``processed'' nodes, and the IDs of both ``processed'' and ``merger'' nodes, such as: @smallexample warning: 2 processed enodes: [EN: 56, EN: 58] merger(s): [EN: 54-55, EN: 57, EN: 59] @end smallexample With a non-zero argument @smallexample __analyzer_dump_exploded_nodes (1); @end smallexample it will also dump all of the states within the ``processed'' nodes. @smallexample __analyzer_dump_region_model (); @end smallexample will dump the region_model's state to stderr. @smallexample __analyzer_eval (expr); @end smallexample will emit a warning with text "TRUE", FALSE" or "UNKNOWN" based on the truthfulness of the argument. This is useful for writing DejaGnu tests. @subsection Other Debugging Techniques One approach when tracking down where a particular bogus state is introduced into the @code{exploded_graph} is to add custom code to @code{region_model::validate}. For example, this custom code (added to @code{region_model::validate}) breaks with an assertion failure when a variable called @code{ptr} acquires a value that's unknown, using @code{region_model::get_value_by_name} to locate the variable @smallexample /* Find a variable matching "ptr". */ svalue_id sid = get_value_by_name ("ptr"); if (!sid.null_p ()) @{ svalue *sval = get_svalue (sid); gcc_assert (sval->get_kind () != SK_UNKNOWN); @} @end smallexample making it easier to investigate further in a debugger when this occurs.