search for: addressof

...args optargs = > | Closure { cbname; cbargs } -> > if types then pr "nbd_%s_callback " cbname; > - pr "%s_callback" cbname > + pr "%s%s_callback" closure_mark cbname Perhaps make it type safe? type closure_mark = AddressOf | Dereference And then: pr "%s%c_callback" (match closure_mark with AddressOf -> '&' | Dereference -> '*') cbname ... > @@ -385,7 +386,7 @@ let generate_lib_unlocked_h () = > pr "\n"; > List.iter ( > fun (name, { ar...

On 09/29/2018 01:09 AM, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > Trunk still has the different gcc and clang versions. > > What's worse, the 7.0.0 release has them too :-( I completely missed > this and we can't fix it for 7.0.1 since that would also be an ABI > break. > Is this something we could fix by adding a symbol alias to the linker script for libLLVM.so? -Tom >

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 04:08:13PM +0400, Robert Khasanov wrote: > Hi Reid, > > Would you approve your patches r203146 and r202774 to be backported to > 3.4.1? They fix stability issues in x86 asm. > Hi Robert, I was able to merge r203146, but it used a c++11 feature: std::string::back() which I replaced with std::string::at(std::string::size() - 1). r202774 was not merged,

...he link? If yes, this is why a do the post-processing after the link. If you talk about something like the -fpie parameter, I used a small trick. The function who will call isModified will calculate the offset dynamically. To do this, you get the address in IR (in C++ this is like (uint64_t)std::addressof(main);) and I remove a constant value. During the post-processing (again) I will update this constant value with the address into the binary. This will give you an offset and you used it to update the addresses. > [I'm always curious as to how these type of designs cope with someone modif...

...http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/307 says, it sounds like the *correctness* issue with protected visibility is because LLVM is doing it wrong -- not an intrinsic property of protected visibility in ELF, or even ELF/x86. The blog says that the compiler should be referencing through the GOT for the addressof operation on a function within the same shared library, thus keeping the address consistent within, and without. But it's not. We should at least fix that, I think? But, the more serious problem to me seems to be the issue with the dynamic link loader performing horribly. That performance pena...

...tions are incorrect or incomplete. I think this has the following consequences for the OpenAnalysis project: - Instead of having the most naive alias analysis as default, an alias analysis that assumes any local variables that do not have their address taken in any way (var ref in parameter list, addressOf operator, etc) should be considered to not alias anyone other variable references. - To write even this most simple alias analysis in OA we must define an interface to the SourceIR (ROSE/Sage or Open64/Whirl or LLVM) that allows us to query the necessary information. >>> Because of this,...

...is a viable, yet more complicated solution. Note that this is a larger issue than just next(). The C++0X standard is introducing several new generic free functions in several existing headers: <iterator> next prev begin end <utility> move forward <memory> addressof undeclare_reachable <functional> ref cref bind <algorithm> all_of any_of none_of move copy_if <numeric> iota (this is not a complete list). Additionally when /any/ two libraries are mixed (e.g. llvm and boost), there is a large potential for name...

Sorry, always end up not replying to the list: The main issue with dealing with next this way is that people adding new uses of next will probably not be using c++0x and therefore won't know it's ambiguous and that it needs to be qualified. There are also two issues with rvalue references and the STL: 1. EquivalenceClasses, in the insert and findLeader functions, it uses map functions

I will try to explain better what I do. The main goal behind this is to verify that a part of code is not modified by someone else (it is an integrity check). To do this, I create in IR a function who take 2 parameters, a begin and an end value. This function perform an hash over the code area (from begin to end) and return it. At first, I don’t know the addresses and the hash value so I put

Hi everyone, Clang/LLVM's support for ELF interposition is in a confusing state, and I propose making a few (hopefully simple) adjustments in order to bring our model into a self-consistent state. The problem: On ELF systems, global symbols can be interposed. This means, for example, that calls to global functions in some (shared) library defined in that same library might end up being

...String (** return a static string (must be located in diff --git a/generator/C.ml b/generator/C.ml index 4d4958d..86d9c5c 100644 --- a/generator/C.ml +++ b/generator/C.ml @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ and print_arg_list' ?(handle = false) ?(types = true) ?(closure_style = Direct) | AddressOf -> "&" | Pointer -> "*" in pr "%s%s_callback" mark cbname - | OFlags (n, _) -> + | OFlags (n, _, _) -> if types then pr "uint32_t "; pr "%s" n ) optargs @@ -494,11 +494,21 @@ let...

As promised in my earlier thread on libnbd completion callback question. Eric Blake (2): generator: Refactor handling of closures in unlocked functions generator: Free closures on failure docs/libnbd.pod | 2 +- generator/C.ml | 48 +++++++++++------ generator/C.mli | 1 + lib/debug.c | 7 +-- lib/opt.c | 31 ++++++-----

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Michelle Strout wrote: > I think some clarifications and examples would be helpful. No problem. :) > - LLVM is in SSA. It is in SSA before alias analysis has been > >>>> performed. With OA, it has been mentioned that the SSA generation > >>>> is > >>>> incorrect because it doesn't take alias analysis information into

----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Y Knight" <jyknight at google.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 9:31:24 AM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Possible soundness issue with

I have two questions about the CRAN machines that build binary packages for Mac. When a new version of a package is released, (A) Do the downstream dependencies get re-checked? (B) Do the downstream dependencies get re-built? I have heard (but do not know for sure) that the answer to (A) is no, the downstream dependencies do not get rechecked. >From publicly available information on the

diff -u --recursive icecast/src/admin.c icecast-new/src/admin.c --- icecast/src/admin.c 2003-07-18 16:29:23.000000000 -0400 +++ icecast-new/src/admin.c 2003-08-06 19:18:32.000000000 -0400 @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ html_write(client, "HTTP/1.0 200 OK\r\n" "Content-Type: text/html\r\n" "\r\n"); - DEBUG1("Sending XSLT

In v2: - now based on my proposal to add LIBNBD_SHUTDOWN_IMMEDIATE - four flags instead of two: STRICT_FLAGS is new (patch 4), and STRICT_BOUNDS is separate from STRICT_ZERO_SIZE (patch 5) - various refactorings for more shared code and less duplication Eric Blake (5): api: Add xxx_MASK constant for each Flags type generator: Refactor filtering of accepted OFlags api: Add