Seiya Nuta via llvm-dev
2019-Mar-26 10:34 UTC
[llvm-dev] GSoC19: Improve LLVM binary utilities
Hi all, My name is Seiya Nuta. I'm studying for my master's degree in University of Tsukuba and interested in the project named "Improve LLVM binary utilities". I've skimmed through llvm-objcopy/llvm-objdump, commit logs, and Bugzilla to figure out what should I do. I have some questions about the project: - What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the most crucial work in this summer. - How can I avoid proposing functionalities that others are already working on? It seems that the tools have been still actively developed. - Are there good first issues related to the project? This is the first time for me to dig into the LLVM source code so currently I cannot show convincing evidence that I'm able to work on the project. Best regards, Seiya
Jake Ehrlich via llvm-dev
2019-Mar-26 18:31 UTC
[llvm-dev] GSoC19: Improve LLVM binary utilities
Hi Seiya, What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the most> crucial work in this summer.This is an opinion that will vary a lot from person to person. At the top of my list is improvements to llvm-objdump and working on MachO backends for LLD and llvm-objcopy. The critical thing to avoid IMO is implementing features without a direct use case in mind. I've let myself fall victim to this mistake many times before. I would ask the community for improvements they want to see and especially relay on your host to guide the direction you take. If you and your host feel that llvm-objcopy is the most critical then I certainly know some people and use cases that would be interested and will respond to an email on llvm-dev asking what you could work on. Several people have been adding bugs for llvm-objcopy recently and you should be able to find things to do there. How can I avoid proposing functionalities that others are already working> on? It seems that the tools have been still actively developed. >The bug tracker is one way to look at this, people will say if they're working on any open bugs there. In practice I found that if I have a real use case and the feature I need hasn't been implemented, no one is likely to be currently working on it. For bigger features you should email llvm-dev. Many people are likely to have thought about how bigger features should be implemented and there's a better chance that someone is already actively working on things. Are there good first issues related to the project? This is the first time> for me to dig into the LLVM source code so currently I cannot show > convincing evidence that I'm able to work on the project.Well I have biased opinions. I'd like alignment to be better handled in llvm-objdump, I'd like for symbol references to be resolved in an easier to parse fashion, and for module and function offsets to be output in a way that makes them easy to jump between. On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:34 AM Seiya Nuta via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi all, > > My name is Seiya Nuta. I'm studying for my master's degree in University > of Tsukuba and interested in the project named "Improve LLVM binary > utilities". I've skimmed through llvm-objcopy/llvm-objdump, commit logs, > and Bugzilla to figure out what should I do. > > I have some questions about the project: > > - What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the > most crucial work in this summer. > - How can I avoid proposing functionalities that others are already > working on? It seems that the tools have been still actively > developed. > - Are there good first issues related to the project? This is the first > time for me to dig into the LLVM source code so currently I cannot > show convincing evidence that I'm able to work on the project. > > Best regards, > Seiya > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190326/e72b545e/attachment-0001.html>
Jordan Rupprecht via llvm-dev
2019-Mar-26 22:40 UTC
[llvm-dev] GSoC19: Improve LLVM binary utilities
(Adding just a bit to Jake's response) On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 11:31 AM Jake Ehrlich via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi Seiya, > > What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the >> most crucial work in this summer. > > > This is an opinion that will vary a lot from person to person. >+1! And don't forget that one of those people is you -- I don't think it would be useful to start a gsoc project on something you don't enjoy just because others think it's important. I would agree about objcopy :) but I'm also happy to help you figure out what project you'd like for any other tool. At the top of my list is improvements to llvm-objdump and working on MachO> backends for LLD and llvm-objcopy. The critical thing to avoid IMO is > implementing features without a direct use case in mind. I've let myself > fall victim to this mistake many times before. I would ask the community > for improvements they want to see and especially relay on your host to > guide the direction you take. If you and your host feel that llvm-objcopy > is the most critical then I certainly know some people and use cases that > would be interested and will respond to an email on llvm-dev asking what > you could work on. Several people have been adding bugs for llvm-objcopy > recently and you should be able to find things to do there. >I think objcopy has the *most* things that have left to be done, but there's plenty of work in other binutils. I'm not sure if any particular bit would be called "crucial" however. A couple ideas that have been kicked around for llvm-objcopy are: * Librarify it (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41044) * Improve MachO/COFF support (COFF support is pretty good, MachO is barely there). * Support ihex (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39841) or efi ( https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40618) [Not that many people are probably asking for these though]> How can I avoid proposing functionalities that others are already working >> on? It seems that the tools have been still actively developed. >> > > The bug tracker is one way to look at this, people will say if they're > working on any open bugs there. In practice I found that if I have a real > use case and the feature I need hasn't been implemented, no one is likely > to be currently working on it. For bigger features you should email > llvm-dev. Many people are likely to have thought about how bigger features > should be implemented and there's a better chance that someone is already > actively working on things. > > Are there good first issues related to the project? This is the first time >> for me to dig into the LLVM source code so currently I cannot show >> convincing evidence that I'm able to work on the project. > > Well I have biased opinions. I'd like alignment to be better handled in > llvm-objdump, I'd like for symbol references to be resolved in an easier to > parse fashion, and for module and function offsets to be output in a way > that makes them easy to jump between. > > Many bugs (though not enough) are tagged with the "beginner" keyword:https://bugs.llvm.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=keyword%3Abeginner&list_id=157827. That's usually a good start.> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:34 AM Seiya Nuta via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> My name is Seiya Nuta. I'm studying for my master's degree in University >> of Tsukuba and interested in the project named "Improve LLVM binary >> utilities". I've skimmed through llvm-objcopy/llvm-objdump, commit logs, >> and Bugzilla to figure out what should I do. >> >> I have some questions about the project: >> >> - What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the >> most crucial work in this summer. >> - How can I avoid proposing functionalities that others are already >> working on? It seems that the tools have been still actively >> developed. >> - Are there good first issues related to the project? This is the first >> time for me to dig into the LLVM source code so currently I cannot >> show convincing evidence that I'm able to work on the project. >> >> Best regards, >> Seiya >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190326/efa63838/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4849 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190326/efa63838/attachment-0001.bin>