search for: safeti

This used to be a single patch, but I split it into two with the addition of struct Scatterlist. Again a bit new with Rust submissions. I was told by Gary Guo to rebase on top of rust-next, but it seems *very* behind? The first patch does not build on its own due to a dead_code warning. It is hard to not have dead code when one is adding infrastructure to be used by others at a later

This is a proposal to create memory safety instrumentation and optimization passes for LLVM. Abstract: The goal of this project is to modify SAFECode and AddressSanitizer (ASAN) to use a common set of memory safety instrumentation and optimization passes to increase code reuse. These tools and other similar ones use varying methods to detect whether memory accesses are safe, but are fundamentally

On 5/24/12 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Kostya, I'm also curious to know where Nuno is going with this, and the > details of his design. I'm worried he might be reinventing the wheel. I'm > also worried that he may be inventing a square wheel :) I believe Nuno's goal is to prevent run-time exploitation of software. Nuno, please correct me if I'm wrong. And

Hello, I'm trying to avoid having to design my own IR for a hobby language that needs safety guarantees similar to those of Java. Have there been any plans or attempts to write a safety verifier for llvm object code or define a set of easily verifiable instructions that can be translated to llvm quickly?

Hi all, Both the rails book (1st Ed) and the docs on the rails site (*and* the Mongrel FAQ) tell me that rails (& ActionPack /ActiveRecord) is not threadsafe. Since I need lots of worker threads in the app I''m working on (details at the end of this mail) this poses quite a problem for me. Is the lack of thread safety a conscious design decision (kind of understandable for rails

On 3/30/12 1:08 PM, Raphael Ernani Rodrigues wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > > My name is Raphael Ernani, and I am doing my MsC at the Federal > University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. I have been using LLVM for a > while, and I would like to participate in this year's Summer of Code. > One particular idea, in your "open projects" page caught my eye, and I > decided to

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:23 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 5/24/12 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Kostya, I'm also curious to know where Nuno is going with this, and > the > > details of his design. I'm worried he might be reinventing the wheel. > I'm > > also worried that he may be inventing a square wheel :) > >

I'd like some similar work to be done, although I view it a bit differently. This might be a separate analysis pass that knows nothing about ASAN or SAFECode and appends metadata nodes to memory access instructions saying things like - this access can not go out of buffer bounds - this access can not touch free-ed memory - this access can not participate in a race - this read

Is there a way to limit outbound calls when feeding files to the outgoing directory in asterisk? I several thousand files i need to feed asterisk, hoping to copy it to the outgoing directory all at 1 time.

Anyone know if the MySQL() application has a configurable timeout? If it tries to connect to a bogus IP, it's timeout seems to be a few minutes. I'd like to cut it down to a few seconds. Doug. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part --------------

I'm currently running Asterisk 10.5.1, compiled from source, and just had someone call saying they couldn't get their voice mail. Looking into the user's voice mail folder, I saw a .lock file. Removing this file, enabled them to get voice mail. Is anybody else seeing this? The system is a new install and has only been running for a week with very little traffic (8 person office).

I was just wondering what existing work has been done on proving programs type-safe using the LLVM framework? I've read the paper on memory-safety for embedded systems, but that's not quite what I'm looking for, as my application (which involves running untrusted code within a trusted context) might fail if a pointer to one object became a pointer to another of the same type. Looking

----- Original Message ----- > From: dag at cray.com > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Elena Demikhovsky" <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>, llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 11:56:14 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Adding masked vector load and store intrinsics > > Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> writes:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> <font size="-1"><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Hello list,<br> <br> is it save to send manager events from a remote website (php) to an Asterisk-server ? Is

Jules, The link Chris forwarded (safecode.cs.uiuc.edu) describes the most relevant work so far. But that work aims to make ordinary C and C++ programs memory-safe, without using garbage collection or any other automatic memory management scheme, i.e., allowing dangling pointers but ensuring they are harmless. It also allows any casts that are legal in C. If you want to enforce strict

Hello, In Rubinius we're seeing an occasional crash inside LLVM that always happens inside getenv(), which is used for example when creating a MCContext (inside lib/MC/MCContext.cpp, it checks getenv("AS_SECURE_LOG_FILE")). The problem is that getenv() and friends aren't thread safe and Rubinius provides a multithreaded system. We can relatively easily get locking setup around

Dear LLVMers, My name is Raphael Ernani, and I am doing my MsC at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. I have been using LLVM for a while, and I would like to participate in this year's Summer of Code. One particular idea, in your "open projects" page caught my eye, and I decided to write a proposal about it. The line that I liked in the page was "Create an LLVM

Right. glibc's amusing stance is that you setenv/putenv are not thread safe, but getenv is. I assume Ruby exposes setenv and therefore simply not calling setenv isn't an option. Would it solve your problems if all getenv() calls happened at cl::ParseCommandLineOptions() time? On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello, > >

Can you say a Virtualized Asterisk with a PRI card! http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTY0OQ Doug -- Ben Franklin quote: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

On 4/6/12 12:50 AM, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > I'd like some similar work to be done, although I view it a bit > differently. > This might be a separate analysis pass that knows nothing about ASAN > or SAFECode > and appends metadata nodes to memory access instructions saying things > like This is a good idea but is the wrong way to implement the idea. LLVM passes are