Fix loop increment crash 1436 #1465
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Contributor
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
Resolves issue vgvassilev#1442 where Clad would crash with a segfault when differentiating functions containing assert statements. The crash occurred in ReferencesUpdater::updateType() when processing SourceLocExpr nodes that return null QualType values. Changes: - Add null checks in ReferencesUpdater::VisitStmt() before calling updateType() - Add defensive null check in ReferencesUpdater::VisitDeclRefExpr() for consistency - Add test case to prevent regression Fixes vgvassilev#1442
Resolves issue vgvassilev#1436 where Clad would crash when differentiating for loops with empty increment expressions (e.g., for(int i=0; i!=1;)). The crash occurred in ReverseModeVisitor::VisitForStmt() when: 1. Line 1029: dyn_cast<DeclRefExpr>(FS->getInc()) on nullptr 2. Line 1042: cast<CompoundStmt>(incDiff.getStmt()) on uninitialized StmtDiff Changes: - Add null check before dyn_cast in increment expression handling - Add null checks before processing increment statement diffs - Protect compound statement casting with proper conditions - Add test case for empty increment loops Fixes vgvassilev#1436
The activity.md file will be used to track personal development progress, issue analysis, and fixes but should not be part of the main repository.
The CI was failing because our tests generated expected warnings but used the wrong FileCheck pattern. Fixed to use: - 'expected-warning' comments for anticipated warnings - 'expected-no-diagnostics' for tests with no warnings - '-Xclang -verify' and '-fsyntax-only' for proper testing This follows the established Clad testing patterns.
vgvassilev
force-pushed
the
fix-loop-increment-crash-1436
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2849bcd to
d60f23b
Compare
Contributor
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
Summary
Fixes the segmentation fault that occurs when Clad attempts to differentiate for loops with empty increment expressions.
Problem
Issue #1436 reported that Clad would crash with a segfault when processing code like:
The crash occurred in ReverseModeVisitor::VisitForStmt() when:
Solution
Added defensive null checks before processing increment expressions:
Testing
Changes
Fixes #1436