Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "issta07v".
2010 Jan 20
2
[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison
...foo (int x, int y) { return x+y; }
The behavior of foo() is undefined when x+y overflows. If course it is
trivial to come up with similar examples based on shifts, multiplies and
divides, etc.
A potential solution is "under-constrained execution":
http://www.stanford.edu/~engler/issta07v-engler.pdf
I will bug Dawson and Daniel and see if I can get ahold of some code for
this.
John
2010 Jan 20
0
[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison
On 01/20/2010 05:54 PM, John Regehr wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've posted an updated code size comparison between LLVM, GCC, and
> others here:
>
> http://embed.cs.utah.edu/embarrassing/
>
> New in this version:
>
> - much larger collection of harvested functions: more than 360,000
>
> - bug fixes and UI improvements
>
> - added the x86 Open64
2010 Jan 20
0
[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison
...a testcase could be manually constructed for the top 10
functions in the size comparison charts,
and see whether they are miscompiled. Repeat until top 10 has no
miscompilations.
>
> A potential solution is "under-constrained execution":
>
> http://www.stanford.edu/~engler/issta07v-engler.pdf
>
> I will bug Dawson and Daniel and see if I can get ahold of some code
> for this.
Although EXE isn't, KLEE is publicly available.
Best regards,
--Edwin
2010 Jan 20
5
[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison
Hi folks,
I've posted an updated code size comparison between LLVM, GCC, and
others here:
http://embed.cs.utah.edu/embarrassing/
New in this version:
- much larger collection of harvested functions: more than 360,000
- bug fixes and UI improvements
- added the x86 Open64 compiler
John