similar to: [LLVMdev] collect2 hack

Hi, I've ran my static checker Calysto on openssh and found the following bug: Possible NULL-ptr deref (vc536): @/work/benchmarks/SOURCES/openssh-4.6p1/moduli.c:173 + ptr gtm returned from gmtime dereferenced without checking (gmtime can return NULL). There are probably more possible NULL-ptr dereferences, but Calysto currently does not check the usage of library functions (for instance, if

New version of Calysto reports a warning that looks like a bug to me: ------------------------------------------ Possible NULL-ptr deref (vc27053): @/work/projects/llvm/tools/Calysto/IfaceSpecs/clib.c:1823 Bug: ?? Explanation: choose_dh (dh.c:111) calls fopen twice (@120). If the first call to fopen fails (returns NULL), but the second one succeeds, fgets (@129) is called with f==NULL.

On 8/29/07, Domagoj Babic <babic.domagoj at gmail.com> wrote: > Seung, > > On 8/25/07, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > Ok. Note that LLVM can represent irreducible loops. You can handle > > this through code duplication. > > -Chris > > > If you are willing to invest more effort into a more complicated analysis, > in many cases you

Seung, On 8/25/07, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > Ok. Note that LLVM can represent irreducible loops. You can handle > this through code duplication. > -Chris If you are willing to invest more effort into a more complicated analysis, in many cases you can even avoid code duplication. See this paper for details: @inproceedings{erosa94taming, author = {Ana M.

Daniel, On 8/30/07, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On 8/29/07, Domagoj Babic <babic.domagoj at gmail.com> wrote: > > Seung, > > > > On 8/25/07, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > > Ok. Note that LLVM can represent irreducible loops. You can handle > > > this through code duplication. > > > -Chris >

Hi all, I have the same problem. My guess is that when a structure is passed as a parameter, you cast it into an array for optimization reasons (less parameters, less stack space). This is, certainly, a reasonable optimization, but makes inter-procedural static analysis more complex. Is there a way to disable it (my guess is that this should be doable by passing some parameter to llvm-gcc)? If

Hi, On 12/11/06, Scott Michel <scottm at rushg.aero.org> wrote: > Here's where my issue about DTRT with llvm-gcc (or whatever your prefix > to llvm tools happens to be) resurfaces. I'm keenly aware that Chris > thinks that one really ought to be careful with having llvm-gcc emit > bytecode. But frankly, if that's the case, what's the point of emitting > byte

Hi, I have this piece of code: tm = local ? localtime(&curr) : gmtime(&curr); if (!tm) return NULL; which translates into something like: ---------------------------------------------- entry: %iftmp.0 = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 %tm = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 ... // Declares iftmp.0 as iftmp.0 call void @llvm.dbg.declare( { }* %iftmp.0, { }* bitcast

Chandler/Domagoj, On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 10:53 -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Unless I'm missing something, the problem lies directly with the fact > that you are trying to do a link-stage operation with the GCC > frontend. GCC, by default, probably runs "ld" or another system > linker, which grabs the executable from binutils. This linker hasn't > been modified

Unless I'm missing something, the problem lies directly with the fact that you are trying to do a link-stage operation with the GCC frontend. GCC, by default, probably runs "ld" or another system linker, which grabs the executable from binutils. This linker hasn't been modified (yet) to include support for .bc files, but you're compiler is emitting byte code to the *.o files.

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:38:50AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 31, 2008, at 9:40 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> However in current llvm svn, when I compile code with llvm-gfortran, I >> get these warning >> flags passed by default so that I get bogus warnings of... >> >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ >>

i install the wine 1.1.25 but after awhile installation stops and heres some detail in terminal > configure: libcapi20 development files not found, ISDN won't be supported. > configure: libldap (OpenLDAP) development files not found, LDAP won't be supported. > > configure: Finished. Do 'make depend && make' to compile Wine. > > cc -c -I. -I.

Hi, I'm trying to compile some apps with the new llvm-gcc4 on amd64 linux to .bc files, rather than to the native code. The same process I used to build those apps before with llvm-gcc3 doesn't work: 1) export CC=llvm-gcc CXX=llvm-g++ CFLAGS="-g -fno-inline" CXXFLAGS="-g -fno-inline" 2) cd <whatever-app>; ./configure 3) make CFLAGS+=-emit-llvm

Reid Spencer wrote: > Chandler/Domagoj, > > On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 10:53 -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote: > >>Unless I'm missing something, the problem lies directly with the fact >>that you are trying to do a link-stage operation with the GCC >>frontend. GCC, by default, probably runs "ld" or another system >>linker, which grabs the executable from

> OK, that worked. > > I checked in your patch to make a static libFLAC-asm.a and > I moved @XMMS_LIBS@ to the end of ...LIBADD. Matt and Ben, > can you try the latest CVS to see if it works for you now? It doesn't work for me. Looks like libtool decided not to link libFLAC-asm.a into libFLAC. Here's the output: Making all in src gmake[1]: Entering directory

hello! Today I tried to compile the new FLAC 0.8 sourcecode on my SuSE Linux 7.1 machine and failed. Below is the output of "make" and "configure". I hope the information is enough that somebody can help me to compile the source. Thanks a lot. PS: A lot of thanks to all developers of FLAC. Its very useful to me!! ------------------------------------------------------ This

Good Afternoon Everyone, I am having a problem with compiling the CVS version of *-addons downloaded today. I am also having problems compiling an older version as well but im ignoring that one for now. I believe I have all the correct libraries, and I have done extensive searches everywhere I just wondered if I was missing something really silly, or if this is a problem other people have

The current llvm/llvm-gcc4.2 svn is now fixed with respect to the extra warnings that were being emitted by the gfortran compiler. The gfortran testsuite results under Intel Darwin9 are appended below. Jack Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9 === gfortran tests === Running target unix/-m32 FAIL: gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error) FAIL:

Building llvm 2.3 and llvm-gcc4.2-2.3 on Mac OS X 10.5, I am seeing the following failures remaining in the gcc 4.2.1 gfortran testsuite... LAST_UPDATED: Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9 === gfortran tests === Running target unix FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL:

# HG changeset patch # User john.levon@sun.com # Date 1161090606 25200 # Node ID c6bfe43048f3becda6966deceb7b70baea833b7c # Parent 03d4223c846b14fc415cfd05d970c7b4d688fddb Many of the tools use C99 features such as bool, or expect certain functions. Fix the CFLAGS to enable these on Solaris. Signed-off-by: John Levon <john.levon@sun.com> diff --git a/config/SunOS.mk b/config/SunOS.mk ---