Skip to content

Address FP reported in #10 #543

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

rvermeulen
Copy link
Collaborator

@rvermeulen rvermeulen commented Feb 22, 2024

Description

Resolve #10

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • rule number here
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • A5-0-2
    • M5-3-1

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

  • Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

The type of conditions in uninitialized templates is unknown
which leads to false positives.
The query already deals with the case where the condition
is in an uninitialized template.
Copy link
Contributor

@nicolaswill nicolaswill left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM and can be merged. However, I noticed a separate issue: reviewing the results on OpenPilot, conditions such as i < 5 in the following example also get reported:

for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { }

The C++14 standard defines the return type of comparison operators as bool, but explicitConversionType in this query is int for the example above. Let me know if you agree that this case is a false-positive and if you want to resolve this as part of this PR or report the issue separately.

I've also made a small correction to the comments in NonBooleanIterationStmt.qll. Please review/approve those changes.

@rvermeulen
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LGTM and can be merged. However, I noticed a separate issue: reviewing the results on OpenPilot, conditions such as i < 5 in the following example also get reported:

for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { }

The C++14 standard defines the return type of comparison operators as bool, but explicitConversionType in this query is int for the example above. Let me know if you agree that this case is a false-positive and if you want to resolve this as part of this PR or report the issue separately.

I've also made a small correction to the comments in NonBooleanIterationStmt.qll. Please review/approve those changes.

Good catch. As far as I can see these are false-positive because they are C files instead of CPP files. Since there is no bool type in C these have type int.
Not sure yet how to deal with that, but it is not going to be in this PR.

@rvermeulen rvermeulen closed this Mar 4, 2024
@rvermeulen rvermeulen reopened this Mar 4, 2024
@rvermeulen rvermeulen enabled auto-merge March 4, 2024 23:11
@rvermeulen rvermeulen added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 4, 2024
Merged via the queue into github:main with commit d2cdde7 Mar 5, 2024
@rvermeulen rvermeulen deleted the rvermeulen/fix-10 branch March 5, 2024 00:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

A5-0-2: Conditions in uninstantiated templates raise false-positives
2 participants