similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM for static code analysis

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.

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

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.

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

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, 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

Hi all, After a long time, I've updated to new LLVM. Everything compiles fine (which is great), but I see that compiling/linking into bitcode files still hasn't been solved in a satisfying way. Until that gets resolved, I'm sending an updated script, that will do the trick. Usage: cd $LLVM_PATH/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.0.1/ mv collect2 llvm-collect2 copy the attached

>> It has a section on "structural analysis" that you will find useful. >> >> Why do you want "for statements"? >> > > Thank you for this info, Chris. > I'm doing this 'cause I'm making a backend for a virtual machine > assembly has an instruction which is very similar to 'for' statement. > I know this seems quite

---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:23:39 -0700 >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] constructing 'for' statement from LLVM bitcode >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > > >On Aug 24, 2007, at 10:07 PM, Seung Jae Lee wrote: > >> Do you have any idea on how I can construct

Hi everybody! I recently started using llvm in a project on inferring additional information about pointers based on their types, casts, etc. The following simple example is giving me a headache :): typedef struct { int a; short b, c; int d, e, f; } foo; void bar(foo f) { short s; s = f.b; } int main(void) { foo p; bar(p); } Because llvm doesn't allow structures and arrays

I've been playing around with llvm lately and I was wondering something about the bitcode instructions for basic arithmetic. Is there any plan to provide instructions that perform widening multiply, or add with carry? It might be written as: mulw i32 %lhs %rhs -> i64 ; widening multiply addw i32 %lhs %rhs -> i33 ; widening add addc i32 %lhs, i32 %rhs, i1 %c -> i33 ; add with carry

Hi, I've just moved a second Samba domain to LDAP -- it works great! However, the first domain is now dead in the water. It refuses to autenticate, and from the logs it looks like it's not find the SambaDomainName entry in the LDAP tree. Here is a diagram of how my LDAP tree is set up. dc=mycompany,dc=com |___ ou=computers |___ ou=people |___ ou=groups |___ sambaDomain=domain1 |___

Hi all, I have set up a printer in cups and I can see it with lpstat -a, and I can print to it. I put what I thought was the appropriate stuff in smb.conf, and yet no printer shows up to the NT client I'm testing with, or in smbclient -L output. Any ideas at all? Here is the relevant info: ### smb.conf excerpts ### [global] ... printing = cups printcap name = cups printcap cache

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com>wrote: > > On Apr 20, 2011, at 4:34 PM, Talin wrote: > > > Also, looking in the SVN repo, it appears that some of the files in > include/llvm/ExecutionEngine have not been touched in a long time, and that > scares me a bit - what's the current state of the LLVM interpreter? > > > >

Wow! Cool! Hey, if you sign my contributor agreement, we can consider making your Elsa/LLVM compiler an Oink tool. Scott's intention is for Elsa to be basically "done": that is, aside from bug fixes, it shouldn't have more features. Oink is basically a bucket into which to throw tools like this one that use Elsa as a front-end. Daniel On Dec 7, 2007 6:37 AM, Richard

I would really like to avoid shipping multiple preprocessors as part of the standard elsa/oink project. On 12/21/07, Taras Glek <tglek at mozilla.com> wrote: > > >> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file > >> Phase: Preprocessing > >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase > >> > > > > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has

>> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file >> Phase: Preprocessing >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase >> > > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has already found one that is > working for him and that is licensed under BSD and that has some > features in it that he needs for source to source transformation. I > would like us to all

I am using Samba PDC with OpenLDAP2 and smbldap-tools. As part of my logon.bat, I call a script called ifmember.exe. This script can list out the groups a user is a member of. It is reporting that my root user is a member of the group 'engr.' I don't know if this is a bug with ifmember.exe or if it's an issue in Samba or in LDAP. Here is some relevant data:

Can someone explain to me what is happening here: ~ $ touch foo ~ $ ln foo bar ~ $ ls foo bar bar foo ~ $ mv foo bar ~ $ ls foo bar bar foo I try to move a file over a hard linked copy of itself and the move fails, but there is no error. Is this the intended behavior? -- Ben Escoto