0000790: integrity problem of the AST on calls to functions with __attribute__ ((noreturn))

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2011-04-12 15:05	patrick	New Issue
2011-04-12 15:05	patrick	Status	new => assigned
2011-04-12 15:05	patrick	Assigned To	=> Anne
2011-04-12 16:05	patrick	Assigned To	Anne => virgile
2011-04-12 16:05	patrick	Category	Plug-in > slicing => Kernel > ACSL implementation
2011-04-12 16:05	patrick	Summary	integrity problem on the exported AST => integrity problem of the AST on calls to functions with __attribute__ ((noreturn))
2011-04-12 16:05	patrick	Description Updated
2011-04-12 16:05	patrick	Additional Information Updated
2011-04-12 16:08	patrick	Note Added: 0001740
2011-04-12 21:05	virgile	Note Added: 0001742
2011-04-13 08:08	patrick	Note Added: 0001743
2011-04-13 18:09	svn	Checkin
2011-04-13 18:09	svn	Status	assigned => resolved
2011-04-13 18:09	svn	Resolution	open => fixed
2011-04-14 14:01	svn	Checkin
2011-10-10 14:13	signoles	Fixed in Version	=> Frama-C Nitrogen-20111001
2011-10-10 14:14	signoles	Status	resolved => closed
2014-02-12 16:59		Note Added: 0004807
2014-02-12 16:59		Status	closed => resolved

Notes
(0001740) patrick (developer) 2011-04-12 16:08	A call to a function with no successor means the function makes no return, nor exit! Isn't it?

(0001742) virgile (developer) 2011-04-12 21:05	Gcc's attribute noreturn means indeed that the called function will never give back control to its caller. That's why a call to such a function has no successor (the integrity checker is wrong here). In practice, an ACSL spec of such a function would always include ensures \false; (and quite often exits \true; though gcc's documentation mentions the fact that the function might in fact do a longjmp).

(0001743) patrick (developer) 2011-04-13 08:08	Don't the kernel should add an "ensures \false;" to the specs of such function?

(0004807) 2014-02-12 16:59	Fix committed to stable/neon branch.

Relationships