similar to: [LLVMdev] using dsa from llvm-poolalloc

Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > I have a few questions on using dsa now that it has been moved out of > llvm. I have llvm -r release_19 checked out from cvs, and > llvm-poolalloc -r release_19 checked out from cvs into the projects > directory, as John Criswell previously suggested. > > 1) I have some compiler transforms that I'm writing that use DSA. They > can no longer

Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >>I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and >>llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so >>llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in >>addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable future. The release_19 >>branch of llvm-poolalloc is designed to always work with the

> I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and > llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so > llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in > addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable future. The release_19 > branch of llvm-poolalloc is designed to always work with the release_19 > branch of LLVM, which

I updated dsa to mainline cvs. Poolalloc is broken, however. On Mar 6, 2007, at 3:39 AM, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > What versions of llvm and llvm-poolalloc should I check out of cvs, in > order to use DSA? In a previous post John Criswell suggested checking > llvm and llvm-poolalloc out of cvs using the -r release_19 flag. > However, there were several post later that said that

How do I acquire that version of DSA that you've updated to mainline cvs? Do I still check out llvm-poolalloc, or is there a way to only check out DSA? Patrick Meredith wrote: > I updated dsa to mainline cvs. Poolalloc is broken, however. > > On Mar 6, 2007, at 3:39 AM, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > >> What versions of llvm and llvm-poolalloc should I check out of cvs, in

What versions of llvm and llvm-poolalloc should I check out of cvs, in order to use DSA? In a previous post John Criswell suggested checking llvm and llvm-poolalloc out of cvs using the -r release_19 flag. However, there were several post later that said that changes should not be made to the release_19 branch. At any rate, I've not seen any update on which versions of llvm and

Chris, I performed the steps you gave below to check out llvm-poolalloc. When I want to get new updates made to llvm-poolalloc, do I perform the following commands? cvs -d :pserver:anon at llvm.org:/var/cvs/llvm login <Hit return for an empty password> cd llvm/projects cvs -d :pserver:anon at llvm.org:/var/cvs/llvm update -r release_19 llvm-poolalloc In other words, do I specify the

Vikram S. Adve wrote: > This kind of regression is a fallout of having some code live in > separate CVS modules as "projects." It would help to have someone > volunteer to maintain each project, which can be as little as making > sure it continues to compile or as much as supporting it with answers > to questions and bug fixes. Here is the current list of projects:

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, John T. Criswell wrote: >>> I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and >>> llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so >>> llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in >>> addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable future. The release_19 >>> branch of

On Feb 13, 2007, at 11:08 AM, John T. Criswell wrote: > there is a difference between RELEASE_19 and release_19. I have not tried, but I won't be surprised if CVS itself gets confused between this two on systems like Darwin which is case insensitive but case preserving. - Devang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

This kind of regression is a fallout of having some code live in separate CVS modules as "projects." It would help to have someone volunteer to maintain each project, which can be as little as making sure it continues to compile or as much as supporting it with answers to questions and bug fixes. Here is the current list of projects: llvm-poolalloc llvm-java (currently unused

Forgot to hit "Reply All." -- John T. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: using dsa Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 09:53:43 -0600 Size: 3103 URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20070306/ef7c2f29/attachment.mht>

Chris Lattner wrote: >On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, John T. Criswell wrote: > > >>>>I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and >>>>llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so >>>>llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in >>>>addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable

Dear John, I intend to implement the improvements on DSA. After running DSA on SPEC, I found DSA gives low precision for mcf and bzip2. I have checked the most imprecise c files in mcf an found that the code seems to be a mixture of "PHI" and "GEP" instructions. Could you please give me some hints about what the big picture of the improvement should be and how to start? Thank

Thank you Patrick! For anyone interested, I was able to get the mainline version of DSA to compile with the mainline version of LLVM. As Patrick pointed out, the mainline version of PoolAllocate does not compile with the mainline version of LLVM. So, I made a small change to llvm-poolalloc/lib/Makefile in which I removed PoolAllocate from the line: PARALLEL_DIRS=DSA PoolAllocate After

Kevin Streit wrote: > Hi all, > > is there any plan when poolalloc and DSA will be adapted to compile and run with LLVM 2.7? I'm currently about to start a bigger project using DSA and it would be nice if I could use LLVM 2.7 instead of porting everything I do now from 2.6 to 2.7 later. > Mainline DSA/Poolalloc already compiles with LLVM 2.7. I will probably create a

Hi, I'm not sure where I should post this small patch to. The `AutoRegen.sh' script in poolalloc branch (under autoconf directory) is unusable (and seems for a long time) to regenerate `configure'. Probably few use it. But before it's purged, please consider the attached patch. Regards, Ryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 12/6/12 4:47 PM, Zvonimir Rakamaric wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been using LLVM in my software analysis projects for quite a few > years now, and several years back I relied on results of DSA analysis > in my SMACK tool for checking C programs. > > At some point that part of SMACK got deprecated, but now I would like > to revisit it since it was working quite well.

Hi all, is there any plan when poolalloc and DSA will be adapted to compile and run with LLVM 2.7? I'm currently about to start a bigger project using DSA and it would be nice if I could use LLVM 2.7 instead of porting everything I do now from 2.6 to 2.7 later. Cheers, Kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type:

Hi, I ran into a problem when running DSA on Linux kernel (the Kernel version I used is 2.4.31). The analysis was aborted when it tried to do DSNode::mergeTypeInfo on some data structure in the kernel. I have filed a bug report at http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1656. My question is what version of Linux kernel LLVM has been tested on successfully? To run DSA analysis, should I use the