Skip to content
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

EssentialType: Implement correct essential types for bitwise binary operators &, ^ and |. #787

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025

Conversation

lcartey
Copy link
Collaborator

@lcartey lcartey commented Oct 28, 2024

Description

Fixes #786.

Implements correct behaviour for binary bitwise operators.

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • rule number here
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • RULE-10-1
    • RULE-10-3
    • RULE-10-4
    • RULE-10-5
    • RULE-10-6
    • RULE-10-7
    • RULE-10-8
    • RULE-12-2

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

  • Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

lcartey and others added 9 commits January 12, 2025 22:29
EssentialBinaryArithmeticOperation and
EssentialBinaryBitwiseOperation only differ in their handling of
+ and - operations, so combine the two implementations to reduce
duplication.

In addition, change the characteristic predicate to an allow list.
This ensures we only capture the intended binary operations, and
exclude any others.
Extract out add/sub expressions special behaviour to improve
clarity. This commit also simplifies the add case by avoiding
referring to left/right explicitly.
Reduce repitition through combining cases.
Avoid repeating code for both the signed and unsigned cases.
Copy link
Contributor

@MichaelRFairhurst MichaelRFairhurst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Refactor is *chef's kiss* fantastic! Great work untangling.

Perfect except for the one straggling commented out closing brace.

c/misra/src/codingstandards/c/misra/EssentialTypes.qll Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@lcartey lcartey enabled auto-merge January 17, 2025 00:20
@lcartey lcartey added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 17, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 8736ca7 Jan 17, 2025
25 checks passed
@lcartey lcartey deleted the lcartey/rule-10-3-bitwise branch January 17, 2025 02:12
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.

RULE-10-3: Essential type of binary bitwise operations is incorrect
2 participants