Frama-C Bug Tracking System

View Issue Details Jump to Notes ] Issue History ] Print ]
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0002416Frama-CPlug-in > E-ACSLpublic2018-12-11 18:202018-12-11 19:42
Reporterrmalak 
Assigned Tosignoles 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
StatusacknowledgedResolutionopen 
Platformx86_64OSLinux 4.18 Ocaml 4.07.0OS VersionDebian Sid
Product VersionFrama-C 18-Argon 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0002416: missing E-ACSL code, control flow graph, function pointer
DescriptionHi, 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; } ////////////////
Steps To Reproduce$ 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
Additional InformationI would like to find a solution that do not involve : - the use of EVA OR - modifying the code
TagsNo tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
(0006695)
signoles (manager)
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 (reporter)
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 (manager)
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).

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2018-12-11 18:20 rmalak New Issue
2018-12-11 18:20 rmalak Status new => assigned
2018-12-11 18:20 rmalak Assigned To => signoles
2018-12-11 19:28 signoles Note Added: 0006695
2018-12-11 19:30 signoles Status assigned => acknowledged
2018-12-11 19:40 rmalak Note Added: 0006696
2018-12-11 19:42 signoles Note Added: 0006697


Copyright © 2000 - 2019 MantisBT Team
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker