similar to: [LLVMdev] request for more info about "disassembler" open ended project

Hi, We have found that exist a huge degradation in performance when doing I/O to a disk images contained in single files from a paravirtualized domain and from an HVM at the same time. The problem was found in a Xen box with Fedora 8 x86_64 binaries installed (Xen 3.1.0 + dom0 Linux 2.6.21). The test hardware was a rack mounted server with two 2.66 Ghz Xeon X5355 (4 cores each one, 128 Kb L1

Aaron, On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 10:38:58PM +0100, Aaron Gray wrote: > http://www.st.cs.uni-sb.de/~lindig/src/quest/ I don't know about Tanu, but we can certainly use this in finding bugs in LLVM! This has been listed as an "open project" for a long time [1], but someone already implemented it, saving us the time and effort. Thanks for the link! [1]

Hi, I've seen on the LLVM's Open Projet Page [1] an idea about using LLVM to generate native code in Valgrind. For what I know, Valgrind uses libVEX to translate native instructions into a bitcode, used to add the instrumentation and then translated back to native code for execution. Valgrind and LLVM are two tools that I use nearly every day. I'm also very interested in code

>> http://www.st.cs.uni-sb.de/~lindig/src/quest/ > > I don't know about Tanu, but we can certainly use this in finding bugs > in LLVM! This has been listed as an "open project" for a long time [1], > but someone already implemented it, saving us the time and effort. > Thanks for the link! > > [1] http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/OpenProjects.html#misc_new > >

On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 06:42:02AM +0100, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > with the small patch attached below the whole llvm toolchain (llvm & > llvm-gcc) will compile and run under AMD64 Linux in native 64-bit LP64 > mode. Sounds great! I'll add it to the list of supported platforms. > This means that compilation, bytecode management and CWriter output > all work as

Tanu, You've seen ? :- http://www.st.cs.uni-sb.de/~lindig/src/quest/ Don't know whether it is applicable to what you are trying to achieve but I thought I should point it out in case it is useful to you and you have not seen it. Aaron ----- Original Message ----- From: Tanu Sharma To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 9:53 PM Subject:

On 02/25/2014 04:50 PM, John Criswell wrote: > > I think a more interesting idea would be to use LLVM to perform > instrumentation and then to use Valgrind to instrument third-party > libraries linked into the program. > > What I'm imagining is this: Let's say you instrument a program with > SAFECode or Asan to find memory safety errors. When you run the program >

Hi, I noticed that LLVM had signed up as a mentoring organization for Google's summer of code. LLVM looks like an exciting project that overlaps some of my interests. I would be interested in developing an additional front end for a language it does not currently support (I'm open to what language). I do not know much about what this entails in regards to what LLVM requires from its

I would try that ..Thanks Another thing that I want to do is to randomize functions within a program (or file ), whatever is easier to do in llvm .Also please tell me how can I randomize global variables ? Thanks TS Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Mon, 30 May 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I have been trying to compile the SPEC benchmark but have failed even > after

my rails version is 2.2.0 i have created a rss feed It is working fine in IE but in fire fox only xml content is showned like "This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below." any idea ? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because

Hi, only one letter got to valgrind-developers mailing list. I'll quote the first message of the thread so that those who do not read llvmdev knew what's this discusssion about. === Begin of the first message === > Hi, > > I've seen on the LLVM's Open Projet Page [1] an idea about using LLVM to > generate native code in Valgrind. For what I know, Valgrind uses libVEX

Hello, I'm looking for a disassembler to examine a malicious Win32 binary on FreeBSD. Does anybody have any favourites? I see pedisassem in ports, but it looks to be broken and unmaintained (it crashes with a floating point error, currently). MC

According to http://www.winehq.com/site/docs/winedev-guide/wine-debugger "It seems that Windows Disassembler 32 currently has problems working correctly under Wine, so use IDA or GoVest." I tried it anyway, and it looked ok while it was disassembling my program. But then, when it finished disassembling, the window was made really tiny, and when I made the window regular-sized, the font

Hi, I have been trying to use LLVM as a disassembler, thus providing a small part of my decompiler that I am working on. It currently decompiles from X86_64 binary.o -> LLVM IR. It works with a small set of test programs so far, so cannot currently handle large binary programs yet. The problem is with the LLVM "getInstruction()" method. It used to have a PC (program counter)

Hi there. I've looking libcpu project and some history of the mailing list and got a question: what is the status of the disassembler? I mean, is there someone working on it, what targets does it support and so on. I mean, it would be interesting to be able to "undo" the operations LLVM does, like machine code->LLVM IR. If there's no one working with this right now, I'd

Other than the x86 disassembler effort, is there an ARM disassembler effort going on? It seems that there have been commits for weeks with messages like "add so-and-so instruction to ARM.td for disassembly purposes only"... -- Thanks, Shih-wei -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello I think I found a bug in the x86 instruction definition file, while trying out the disassembler. It looks like the "ADD32rr_alt" instruction should have GR32 operands, not GR16. Attached you can find a patch, which should fix the problem. But even with the change I can not decode e.g. "0x03 0xC1" (should be "addl %ecx, %eax") only if I remove the

I'm wondering if anyone is working on a machine code -> LLVM bitcode disassembler? Obviously, there won't be a one-to-one correspondence but it seems like you should be able to get close. There's always inline asm for the remaining fragments. So is there such a thing? Thank you, Bob

Hi there! In the x86 disassembler I noticed an if-statement with a duplicated branch. Are these intended to be identical? Best regards, Nicolas Kaiser -- diff -ur llvm-2.8.orig/lib/Target/X86/Disassembler/X86DisassemblerDecoder.c llvm-2.8/lib/Target/X86/Disassembler/X86DisassemblerDecoder.c --- llvm-2.8.orig/lib/Target/X86/Disassembler/X86DisassemblerDecoder.c 2010-05-06 22:59:00.000000000 +0200

Hi, The x86 (32-bit) disassembler can't disassemble any of the following: 0x2b 0xc9 0x8a 0xc8 0xdd 0x04 0x24 These are: subl %ecx, %ecx movb %al, %cl fldl (%esp) I've attached patches to bug#8873 which fix all these issues, but I'm not confident that I've fixed them the right way. The first two problems are caused by the instructions setting 'isCodeGenOnly =