Piotr Padlewski via llvm-dev
2017-Jan-16 21:13 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Your help needed: List of LLVM Open Projects 2017
The list can't ommit clang-tidy. There are many ideas about new checks on llvm bugzilla. https://llvm.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?product=clang-tools-extra&component=clang-tidy&resolution=---&list_id=110936 Everything matching ".*Feature Request.*" Piotr 2017-01-16 21:31 GMT+01:00 Sean Silva via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>:> Do we have any open projects on LLD? > > I know we usually try to avoid any big "projects" and mainly add/fix > things in response to user needs, but just wondering if somebody has any > ideas. > > Some really generic/simple stuff I can think of: > 1. trying out LLD on a large program corpus and reporting/reducing/fixing > bugs (e.g. contributing to the FreeBSD effort or trying to build a bunch of > packages from a linux distro like Debian or Gentoo) > 2. performance analysis and optimization of LLD > 3. getting LLD to link a bootable Linux kernel and/or GRUB > 4. write an input verifier such that LLD can survive intensive fuzzing > with no crashes / fatal errors [1] when the verifier says the input is > okay. This will allow us to measure what the overhead of doing this > actually is. > > > [1] As of the latest LLD discussion (in the thread "[llvm-dev] LLD status > update and performance chart") it sounds like people are okay with LLD > treating fatal errors the same way that LLVM uses assertions; for inputs > from the C++ API, we can document to not pass corrupted object files. For > inputs read from files, there is still community interest in at least > having the option to run a "verifier" to validate the inputs. I think the > best way to approach the verifier is to essentially follow the approach > suggested by Peter (in the context of "hardening") in > https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30540#c5 i.e. getting to the point > where LLD can survive intensive fuzzing. > > -- Sean Silva > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Vassil Vassilev via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Happy new year! >> >> Last LLVM Developers' Meeting I had a BoF: 'Raising Next Generation >> LLVM Developers'. It was suggested that we should update our open projects >> page and possibly restructure it a little bit. >> >> I volunteered to do this work and I need your help. >> >> >> Chandler and I started working on a google doc [1]. We pinged few code >> owners asking them to list of work items we should get done in 2017 but we >> do not have the manpower. Now we would like to ask for your input, too. >> >> I believe an up to date list can serve as a good entry point for >> students, interns and new contributors. >> >> Feel free to propose a new item or comment under an existing one. I >> expect to start gradually updating the page beginning of Feb. >> >> -- Vassil >> >> [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLK_xINSg1Ei0w8w39uAMR1n >> 0dlf6wrzfypiX0YDQBc/edit?usp=sharing >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170116/f967b177/attachment.html>
Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev
2017-Jan-16 21:14 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Your help needed: List of LLVM Open Projects 2017
Please submit patches to Open Projects pages! Winter^WSummer of Code is coming! On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Piotr Padlewski via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> The list can't ommit clang-tidy. > There are many ideas about new checks on llvm bugzilla. > https://llvm.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?product=clang-tools-extra&component=clang-tidy&resolution=---&list_id=110936 > Everything matching ".*Feature Request.*" > > Piotr > > 2017-01-16 21:31 GMT+01:00 Sean Silva via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>: >> >> Do we have any open projects on LLD? >> >> I know we usually try to avoid any big "projects" and mainly add/fix >> things in response to user needs, but just wondering if somebody has any >> ideas. >> >> Some really generic/simple stuff I can think of: >> 1. trying out LLD on a large program corpus and reporting/reducing/fixing >> bugs (e.g. contributing to the FreeBSD effort or trying to build a bunch of >> packages from a linux distro like Debian or Gentoo) >> 2. performance analysis and optimization of LLD >> 3. getting LLD to link a bootable Linux kernel and/or GRUB >> 4. write an input verifier such that LLD can survive intensive fuzzing >> with no crashes / fatal errors [1] when the verifier says the input is okay. >> This will allow us to measure what the overhead of doing this actually is. >> >> >> [1] As of the latest LLD discussion (in the thread "[llvm-dev] LLD status >> update and performance chart") it sounds like people are okay with LLD >> treating fatal errors the same way that LLVM uses assertions; for inputs >> from the C++ API, we can document to not pass corrupted object files. For >> inputs read from files, there is still community interest in at least having >> the option to run a "verifier" to validate the inputs. I think the best way >> to approach the verifier is to essentially follow the approach suggested by >> Peter (in the context of "hardening") in >> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30540#c5 i.e. getting to the point >> where LLD can survive intensive fuzzing. >> >> -- Sean Silva >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Vassil Vassilev via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Happy new year! >>> >>> Last LLVM Developers' Meeting I had a BoF: 'Raising Next Generation >>> LLVM Developers'. It was suggested that we should update our open projects >>> page and possibly restructure it a little bit. >>> >>> I volunteered to do this work and I need your help. >>> >>> >>> Chandler and I started working on a google doc [1]. We pinged few code >>> owners asking them to list of work items we should get done in 2017 but we >>> do not have the manpower. Now we would like to ask for your input, too. >>> >>> I believe an up to date list can serve as a good entry point for >>> students, interns and new contributors. >>> >>> Feel free to propose a new item or comment under an existing one. I >>> expect to start gradually updating the page beginning of Feb. >>> >>> -- Vassil >>> >>> [1] >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLK_xINSg1Ei0w8w39uAMR1n0dlf6wrzfypiX0YDQBc/edit?usp=sharing >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-dev mailing list >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
Vassil Vassilev via llvm-dev
2017-Jan-17 15:56 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Your help needed: List of LLVM Open Projects 2017
On 16/01/17 22:13, Piotr Padlewski wrote:> The list can't ommit clang-tidy.Sure.> There are many ideas about new checks on llvm bugzilla. > https://llvm.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?product=clang-tools-extra&component=clang-tidy&resolution=---&list_id=110936 > Everything matching ".*Feature Request.*"Can you select 2 promising ideas and wrap them in a 10-week (student) project? -- Vassil> > Piotr > > 2017-01-16 21:31 GMT+01:00 Sean Silva via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>>: > > Do we have any open projects on LLD? > > I know we usually try to avoid any big "projects" and mainly > add/fix things in response to user needs, but just wondering if > somebody has any ideas. > > Some really generic/simple stuff I can think of: > 1. trying out LLD on a large program corpus and > reporting/reducing/fixing bugs (e.g. contributing to the FreeBSD > effort or trying to build a bunch of packages from a linux distro > like Debian or Gentoo) > 2. performance analysis and optimization of LLD > 3. getting LLD to link a bootable Linux kernel and/or GRUB > 4. write an input verifier such that LLD can survive intensive > fuzzing with no crashes / fatal errors [1] when the verifier says > the input is okay. This will allow us to measure what the overhead > of doing this actually is. > > > [1] As of the latest LLD discussion (in the thread "[llvm-dev] LLD > status update and performance chart") it sounds like people are > okay with LLD treating fatal errors the same way that LLVM uses > assertions; for inputs from the C++ API, we can document to not > pass corrupted object files. For inputs read from files, there is > still community interest in at least having the option to run a > "verifier" to validate the inputs. I think the best way to > approach the verifier is to essentially follow the approach > suggested by Peter (in the context of "hardening") in > https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30540#c5 > <https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30540#c5> i.e. getting to > the point where LLD can survive intensive fuzzing. > > -- Sean Silva > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Vassil Vassilev via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Happy new year! > > Last LLVM Developers' Meeting I had a BoF: 'Raising Next > Generation LLVM Developers'. It was suggested that we should > update our open projects page and possibly restructure it a > little bit. > > I volunteered to do this work and I need your help. > > > Chandler and I started working on a google doc [1]. We > pinged few code owners asking them to list of work items we > should get done in 2017 but we do not have the manpower. Now > we would like to ask for your input, too. > > I believe an up to date list can serve as a good entry point > for students, interns and new contributors. > > Feel free to propose a new item or comment under an existing > one. I expect to start gradually updating the page beginning > of Feb. > > -- Vassil > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLK_xINSg1Ei0w8w39uAMR1n0dlf6wrzfypiX0YDQBc/edit?usp=sharing > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLK_xINSg1Ei0w8w39uAMR1n0dlf6wrzfypiX0YDQBc/edit?usp=sharing> > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev> > > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev> > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170117/23d2f3e8/attachment.html>
Piotr Padlewski via llvm-dev
2017-Jan-18 20:45 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Your help needed: List of LLVM Open Projects 2017
2017-01-17 16:56 GMT+01:00 Vassil Vassilev <v.g.vassilev at gmail.com>:> On 16/01/17 22:13, Piotr Padlewski wrote: > > The list can't ommit clang-tidy. > > Sure. > > There are many ideas about new checks on llvm bugzilla. > https://llvm.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?product=clang-tools-extra& > component=clang-tidy&resolution=---&list_id=110936 > Everything matching ".*Feature Request.*" > > Can you select 2 promising ideas and wrap them in a 10-week (student) > project? > -- Vassil > > Yep, I will send you something in few days.> > Piotr > > 2017-01-16 21:31 GMT+01:00 Sean Silva via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> > : > >> Do we have any open projects on LLD? >> >> I know we usually try to avoid any big "projects" and mainly add/fix >> things in response to user needs, but just wondering if somebody has any >> ideas. >> >> Some really generic/simple stuff I can think of: >> 1. trying out LLD on a large program corpus and reporting/reducing/fixing >> bugs (e.g. contributing to the FreeBSD effort or trying to build a bunch of >> packages from a linux distro like Debian or Gentoo) >> 2. performance analysis and optimization of LLD >> 3. getting LLD to link a bootable Linux kernel and/or GRUB >> 4. write an input verifier such that LLD can survive intensive fuzzing >> with no crashes / fatal errors [1] when the verifier says the input is >> okay. This will allow us to measure what the overhead of doing this >> actually is. >> >> >> [1] As of the latest LLD discussion (in the thread "[llvm-dev] LLD status >> update and performance chart") it sounds like people are okay with LLD >> treating fatal errors the same way that LLVM uses assertions; for inputs >> from the C++ API, we can document to not pass corrupted object files. For >> inputs read from files, there is still community interest in at least >> having the option to run a "verifier" to validate the inputs. I think the >> best way to approach the verifier is to essentially follow the approach >> suggested by Peter (in the context of "hardening") in >> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30540#c5 i.e. getting to the point >> where LLD can survive intensive fuzzing. >> >> -- Sean Silva >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Vassil Vassilev via llvm-dev < >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Happy new year! >>> >>> Last LLVM Developers' Meeting I had a BoF: 'Raising Next Generation >>> LLVM Developers'. It was suggested that we should update our open projects >>> page and possibly restructure it a little bit. >>> >>> I volunteered to do this work and I need your help. >>> >>> >>> Chandler and I started working on a google doc [1]. We pinged few code >>> owners asking them to list of work items we should get done in 2017 but we >>> do not have the manpower. Now we would like to ask for your input, too. >>> >>> I believe an up to date list can serve as a good entry point for >>> students, interns and new contributors. >>> >>> Feel free to propose a new item or comment under an existing one. I >>> expect to start gradually updating the page beginning of Feb. >>> >>> -- Vassil >>> >>> [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLK_xINSg1Ei0w8w39uAMR1n >>> 0dlf6wrzfypiX0YDQBc/edit?usp=sharing >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-dev mailing list >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev >> >> > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170118/e94baf42/attachment.html>