Frama-C Bug Tracking System - Frama-C
View Issue Details
0002416Frama-CPlug-in > E-ACSLpublic2018-12-11 18:202018-12-11 19:42
rmalak 
signoles 
normalminoralways
acknowledgedopen 
x86_64Linux 4.18 Ocaml 4.07.0Debian Sid
Frama-C 18-Argon 
 
0002416: missing E-ACSL code, control flow graph, function pointer
Hi, Is there a workaround for the function pointer limitation //////////////// cfg.c void func(void) { int i = 0 ; int *ptr = &i; /*@ assert \valid(ptr); */ *ptr = 0 ; } int main(int argc, char **argv) { void (*ptr_func)(void) = &func; (*ptr_func)(); return 0; } ////////////////
$ frama-c -machdep gcc_x86_64 cfg.c -e-acsl -then-last -print -ocode cfg.e-acsl.c [kernel] Parsing FRAMAC_SHARE/e-acsl/e_acsl_gmp_api.h (with preprocessing) [kernel] Parsing FRAMAC_SHARE/e-acsl/e_acsl.h (with preprocessing) [kernel] Parsing cfg.c (with preprocessing) [e-acsl] beginning translation. [e-acsl] cfg.c:12: Warning: function pointers may introduce too limited instrumentation. [e-acsl] translation done in project "e-acsl". $ gcc -DE_ACSL_SEGMENT_MMODEL -Wno-attributes -I$(frama-c -print-share-path)/e-acsl/ -o cfg.e-acsl cfg.e-acsl.c $(frama-c -print-share-path)/e-acsl/e_acsl_rtl.c $(frama-c -print-share-path)/../../lib/libeacsl-dlmalloc.a $(frama-c -print-share-path)/../../lib/libeacsl-gmp.a -lm $ ./cfg.e-acsl Assertion failed at line 5 in function func. The failing predicate is: \valid(ptr). Aborted
I would like to find a solution that do not involve : - the use of EVA OR - modifying the code
No tags attached.
Issue History
2018-12-11 18:20rmalakNew Issue
2018-12-11 18:20rmalakStatusnew => assigned
2018-12-11 18:20rmalakAssigned To => signoles
2018-12-11 19:28signolesNote Added: 0006695
2018-12-11 19:30signolesStatusassigned => acknowledged
2018-12-11 19:40rmalakNote Added: 0006696
2018-12-11 19:42signolesNote Added: 0006697

Notes
(0006695)
signoles   
2018-12-11 19:28   
Yes, you should use the option -e-acsl-full-mmodel (at the price of a slower generated code).
(0006696)
rmalak   
2018-12-11 19:40   
Thanks ! Maybe at some point, I will start to understand that each time I have a question about missing E-ACSL annotation, I should first try this magic option ! And it was written in the manual : "systematically instrument the code for handling potential memory-related annotations even when it is not required"
(0006697)
signoles   
2018-12-11 19:42   
Indeed, this option is most of the time necessary for dealing with large/complex pieces of code (for the time being).