C Instrumentation Framework

A simple solution is to add a check for zero as an array size in C backend and to omit its printing.
The only drawback is incorrect processing of zero-length arrays.
But zero-length array is a gcc-specific extension, while flexible array member is a part of C99 standard.

In fact the issue described didn't lead to errors. It looks like there is a bug in CIL or/and BLAST. Here is the simplest example to reproduce the issue (test2_short.c):

struct S
{
  int field;
  int arr[];
};
struct S var1 = { .field = 0, .arr = { [0] = 1 } };
struct S var2 = { .field = 0, .arr = { [0] = 1, [1] = 2 } };
int main() { return 0; }
int func() { ERROR: goto ERROR; }

pblast.opt test2_short.c test3.c

error in createGlobal(var2: test2_short.c:7): Errormsg.ErrorPutting in initializer __BLAST_initialize_test2_short.c
No reroute info supplied!
Error: There were parsing errors in test3.c
Timings:
TOTAL                          0.001 s (1)
  Parse:                         0.001 s (1)
Ack! The gremlins again!: Errormsg.Error
Ack! The gremlins again!: Errormsg.Error
Fatal error: exception Errormsg.Error

struct S var2 = { .field = 0, .arr = { 1, 2 } };

struct S var2 = { .field = 0, .arr = { 1, [3] = 2 } };

And why blast worked well without aspectator? What is the difference?

Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:

And why blast worked well without aspectator? What is the difference?

static const struct ieee80211_regdomain rtl_regdom_11 = {
 .n_reg_rules = 1,
 .alpha2 = "99",
 .reg_rules = {
        { .freq_range.start_freq_khz = ((2412-10) * 1000), .freq_range.end_freq_khz = ((2462+10) * 1000), .freq_range.max_bandwidth_khz = ((40) * 1000), .power_rule.max_antenna_gain = ((0) * 100), .power_rule.max_eirp = ((20) * 100), .flags = 0, },
 }
};

static const struct ieee80211_regdomain rtl_regdom_12_13 = {
 .n_reg_rules = 2,
 .alpha2 = "99",
 .reg_rules = {
        { .freq_range.start_freq_khz = ((2412-10) * 1000), .freq_range.end_freq_khz = ((2462+10) * 1000), .freq_range.max_bandwidth_khz = ((40) * 1000), .power_rule.max_antenna_gain = ((0) * 100), .power_rule.max_eirp = ((20) * 100), .flags = 0, },
        { .freq_range.start_freq_khz = ((2467-10) * 1000), .freq_range.end_freq_khz = ((2472+10) * 1000), .freq_range.max_bandwidth_khz = ((40) * 1000), .power_rule.max_antenna_gain = ((0) * 100), .power_rule.max_eirp = ((20) * 100), .flags = NL80211_RRF_PASSIVE_SCAN, },
 }
};

1. We should investigate why BLAST doesn't fail when it has one file with parsing errors (most likely with other kinds of errors too) as input and fails when it has several files at least one of which has parsing errors.
2. We should fix CIL or report CIL developers since CIL doesn't parse correct programs. For us this means that it can build incorrect program model that will lead to tricky failures (e.g. with using advanced pointer analysis).

Evgeny Novikov wrote:

(where test3.c is empty file) I have following errors:
[...]

I forgot to copy from BLAST output such the error message:

test2_short.c:7: Error: INDEX designator is outside bounds