similar to: [LLVMdev] Deadline for Release Notes Changes

John, The release source code (sc-main.tar) won't compile cleanly under Debian6-i386 (gcc/g++: 4.4.5). The compiler back trace is attached. Please fix it/them and repost. Or, 64b system is a requirement? Thank you Chuck llvm[4]: Compiling TypeRuntime.cpp for Release+Asserts build (PIC) cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors

Please create a similar branch for Klee; I've been working on porting that to 2.7 as well.<br /> <br /> Best, Erich Ocean<br /> <br /> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:43 PM, John Criswell (criswell@uiuc.edu) wrote:<br /> > <br /> > Dear SAFECoders and LLVMers,<br /> > <br /> > There is some new work on moving DSA to the new LLVM 2.7 API.

yiqiuping1986 wrote: > Hi， John Criswell！ > You have said to me that SAFECode had not been maintained for several > years, Just to clarify, SAFECode *has* been and *is* maintained (primarily by me). The release_26 branch in the SVN repository works with LLVM 2.6, and mainline is working (with some regressions) with the upcoming LLVM 2.7. You can subscribe to the SVA Commits mailing list

Hi, My apologies for the trouble. I've disabled building DynamicTypeChecks for now (r138224) and now it builds cleanly on 32bit for me here. As for SAFECode support for 32bit vs 64bit, I believe 32bit should work just fine although I haven't personally tested this. Let me know if you have any further issues/questions. ~Will On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Chuck Zhao <czhao at

Dear All, We have a new release of Clang with SAFECode technology for detecting memory safety errors. Memory safety checking (SAFECode for short) can be turned on with a single command line switch to clang/clang++. The SAFECode techniques do not change the behavior of the clang/clang++ compilers in any way when the switch is turned off, so this can be used as a drop-in replacement for

Dear Manish, First, in answer to your original question: yes, there is a pass that will convert constant expression GEPs used within LLVM instructions into GEP instructions. SAFECode has a pass called BreakConstantGEPs in safecode/trunk/lib/ArrayBoundChecks/BreakConstantGEPs.cpp (http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/safecode/trunk/lib/ArrayBoundChecks/BreakConstantGEPs.cpp?view=log). It

On Mar 6, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Patrick Sathyanathan wrote: > Hi, > > I'm interested in using the "Data Structure Analysis" that is apparently in the "poolalloc" module according to the documentation on alias analysis in LLVM. I have downloaded and built LLVM 2.6 on MinGW but the sources do not seem to include anything related to pool allocation. I don't think

Dear All, I'm currently upgrading SAFECode to the LLVM 2.7 API. I'm getting some strange errors in LLVM Passes that use analysis groups and multiple inheritance. To create analysis groups in LLVM 2.6, I would first create a base class for the analysis group and then another class that inherited from both ModulePass and the analysis group base class. That worked in LLVM 2.6, but

John, I have looked at the real code (instead of the obsolete one) and it appears to be easy to find if an operand is a getelementptr instruction. if (ConstantExpr * CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(I.getOperand(0))) { Out<< "*** operand 0 is a constant Expr******"; if (CE->getOpcode() == Instruction::GetElementPtr) { Out<< "*** operand 0 is

On 3/29/12 3:59 PM, Victor Campos wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > > I have been working on Douglas's range analysis, and today, after > toiling with it for two years, we have a very mature and robust > implementation, which is publicly available at > http://code.google.com/p/range-analysis/. We can, at this point, > perform range analysis on very large benchmarks in a few

Bob Wilson wrote: > On Mar 6, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Patrick Sathyanathan wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> I'm interested in using the "Data Structure Analysis" that is apparently in the "poolalloc" module according to the documentation on alias analysis in LLVM. I have downloaded and built LLVM 2.6 on MinGW but the sources do not seem to include anything

Hi， John Criswell！ You have said to me that SAFECode had not been maintained for several years, now I have submitted my proposal for updating the SAFCode project to the new LLVM APIs. If you are still interested in the topic and willing to guid my project, I will be very happy. Now I'm waiting for you comments. Here is my proposal:

Hi. I had some problems with MI too. See bug 6251. g Am 25.03.2010 um 16:18 schrieb John Criswell <criswell at uiuc.edu>: > Dear All, > > I'm currently upgrading SAFECode to the LLVM 2.7 API. I'm getting > some > strange errors in LLVM Passes that use analysis groups and multiple > inheritance. > > To create analysis groups in LLVM 2.6, I would first

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

John Regehr wrote: > Qiuping, > > Have you looked at what has already been done? I would expect that taking > previous work such as this: > > http://llvm.org/pubs/2006-05-24-SAFECode-BoundsCheck.html > > and integrating into current LLVM would be a better idea than starting > over. > This code is publicly available from the SAFECode project (see

On 11/13/12 12:37 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Nov 13, 2012, at 7:52 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > >>> John, it was not my intention to disrupt your work in any way. >>> However, branching for release is a bit of a grey area and I >>> have made a judgment call to branch SAFECode in sync with llvm. >>> This could have been a

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

On 2010-10-04 06:43, Chris Lattner wrote: > Hi All, > > I've finished the first draft of the 2.8 release notes: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html > > Please feel free to commit improvements and enhancements. There are "a lot" of changes that went into 2.8, but I think I've scraped most of them out of the commits. However, it is also highly likely that I

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

Thanks Bob and John for the response. I am having problems building poolalloc with my MinGW and gcc 4.4.0 setup. Running make in the poolalloc directory results in a bunch of "undefined reference to ..." link errors building Release/lib/LLVMDataStructure.dll. I looked at the command line for this link and found that there are no libraries included with "-l..." options even