Skip to content

Goto-symex: record value-at-declaration in the back-end #6875

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 1, 2022

Conversation

tautschnig
Copy link
Collaborator

Declarations are printed as part of a symex trace, and come with both a
symbol being declared as well as an (unconstrained) initial value for
that symbol. The decision procedure must learn about the initial value
to include it in the model. Else, the trace value would just be question
marks.

Fixes: #6845

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • n/a Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • n/a The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • n/a White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

Declarations are printed as part of a symex trace, and come with both a
symbol being declared as well as an (unconstrained) initial value for
that symbol. The decision procedure must learn about the initial value
to include it in the model. Else, the trace value would just be question
marks.

Fixes: diffblue#6845
@tautschnig tautschnig force-pushed the bugfixes/6845-part-2-decl branch from 666b787 to 0ce746a Compare May 24, 2022 08:54
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 24, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #6875 (0ce746a) into develop (f9456fe) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #6875   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    77.79%   77.80%           
========================================
  Files         1567     1567           
  Lines       179818   179820    +2     
========================================
+ Hits        139895   139912   +17     
+ Misses       39923    39908   -15     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/goto-symex/symex_target_equation.cpp 95.35% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
src/ansi-c/expr2c.cpp 67.53% <0.00%> (-0.10%) ⬇️
src/solvers/smt2/smt2_conv.cpp 67.61% <0.00%> (+0.35%) ⬆️
...olvers/flattening/c_bit_field_replacement_type.cpp 100.00% <0.00%> (+46.66%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bd45729...0ce746a. Read the comment docs.

@@ -389,6 +389,8 @@ void symex_target_equationt::convert_decls(
// The result is not used, these have no impact on
// the satisfiability of the formula.
decision_procedure.handle(step.cond_expr);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the handle for the cond_expr needed at all then?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, one of them is ssa_lhs, the other is ssa_full_lhs.

@tautschnig tautschnig merged commit 15d60af into diffblue:develop Jun 1, 2022
@tautschnig tautschnig deleted the bugfixes/6845-part-2-decl branch June 1, 2022 06:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Counter-example traces for struct types incomplete
3 participants