Fix refinement in baseInvariant for more complicated lvals
#1701
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow-up to #1659 which was incorrect as demonstrated by the nightly SV-COMP run.
The offset handling was slightly off there, leading to points-to sets becoming empty when they should not. The correct thing is to:
Mem (Lval lv), offpair, take theLval lvpart (including any possible offsets it may have), and consider all the values of those separately byLval lvin baseMem (Lval lv), offw.r.t. to this new state (for technical reasons computed by appending off to the value ofLval lv- queries use stale values).bot.I did not test all cases, but the unsoundness is fixed and all the
BothBranchesDeadones I tested as well, so I would suggest to merge this right away, as the current state is broken.