Skip to content

Refactor EXP37-C rule to improve performance - #1189

Open
mbaluda wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
mbaluda/exp37-c
Open

Refactor EXP37-C rule to improve performance#1189
mbaluda wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
mbaluda/exp37-c

Conversation

@mbaluda

@mbaluda mbaluda commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

This pull request refactors the logic for detecting function calls with incompatible arguments by simplifying predicate signatures and improving how parameters are matched with function calls.
The changes focus on solving performance issues with newer CodeQL versions.

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:
    • EXP37-C

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!)

@mbaluda
mbaluda requested review from a team and a balanced review from Copilot August 28, 2026 09:05

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot review overview

Review tier: Balanced
Findings: 1 Low severity

New issues introduced by this change (1)
Severity Finding
Low severity cpp/​common/​src/​codingstandards/​cpp/​MistypedFunctionArguments.qll — This is explicitly a performance change to an existing query, so the “No” selection in the PR…
What changed in this PR

Refactors EXP37-C parameter matching to improve CodeQL evaluation performance while preserving diagnostics.

Changes:

  • Removes the redundant Function predicate parameter.
  • Resolves parameters directly from each call target.
  • Required performance change note is missing; runtime validation remains unconfirmed.
File Description
MistypedFunctionArguments.qll Simplifies shared predicate signatures.
DoNotCallFunctionsWithIncompatibleArguments.ql Updates parameter binding and predicate calls.

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Comment thread cpp/common/src/codingstandards/cpp/MistypedFunctionArguments.qll
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.

2 participants