similar to: [LLVMdev] summer of code idea — checking bounds overflow bugs

易秋萍 wrote: > > Hi, > > Some days ago I am interested in detecting undefined behaviors > > in C programs based on Clang. After several days’ investigation, I think > > checking bounds overflow bugs is more interesting, because bounds > > overflow is one of the most frequently encountered errors in C programs. > > For example, performing pointer arithmetic without

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

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:

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

2010-04-01 yiqiuping1986 发件人： John Criswell 发送时间： 2010-03-30 23:44:58 收件人： 易秋萍 抄送： llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu 主题： Re: [LLVMdev] summer of code idea— checking boun ds overflow bugs 易秋萍 wrote: Hi, Some days ago I am interested in detecting undefined behaviors in C programs based on Clang. After several days’ investigation, I think checking bounds overflow bugs is more interesting,

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. John On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, ??? wrote: > > Hi, > > Some days ago I am interested in detecting undefined behaviors > > in C

Sounds an good idea, is that means lowerinng down the SAFECode project from the higher level(clang)to lower level for an more general work on bound check? I aslo want to know is it possoble to detecting memory leak at the very low(llvm ir) level to detecting memory leaks? Or at llvm ir level to providing an stackfull hooks? It's very useful to have such an feature. The stack hooks can help us

John, Many thanks for your prompt reply! You think it a better idea than a new implementation of bounds overflow checking, that integrating previous work such as this: http://llvm.org/pubs/2006-05-24-SAFECode-BoundsCheck.html into current LLVM. Yes? 在 2010年3月31日 下午12:11，John Regehr <regehr at cs.utah.edu>写道： > Hi Qiuping, > > I don't know much about SAFECode, you should

On Mar 12, 2007, at 10:34 AM, Fabian Scheler wrote: > After playing around a bit with LLVM, I > decided to use LLVM, because of its great documentation, its clean and > straight-forward design and it because it seems to be easily > applicable also for beginners. A gratuitous plug for a recent research project: If you use LLVM, you can also get a compiler called SAFECode that (a)

Hi, John Criswell Thank you very much. I am installing LLVM-3.2, but I encounter the next error when carrying out "make": llvm[3]: Compiling ClangASTNodesEmitter.cpp for Release+Asserts build ClangASTNodesEmitter.cpp: In member function ‘std::pair<llvm::Record*, llvm::Record*><unnamed>::ClangASTNodesEmitter::EmitNode(const std::multimap<llvm::Record*, llvm::Record*,

Hello everybody, I'm developing a source code transformation system for real-time systems currently, i.e. I want to map the application (a set of event handlers) to a run-time or operating system semi-automatically (if anybody is interested in the background - see below, of course, comments are welcome there, too ;-)). Therefore, I have to be able to express dependencies between different

Thank you. But now I am using LLVM 2.9, so which version of poolalloc I should use ? -------------------------------------------- Qiuping Yi Institute Of Software Chinese Academy of Sciences On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:12 PM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Qiuping, > > If you use the release_32 branch of poolalloc, then you need to use LLVM > 3.2. >

I am just not upgrade my LLVM. So I must use some higer LLVM version, right? -------------------------------------------- Qiuping Yi Institute Of Software Chinese Academy of Sciences On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:21 PM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 1/30/15 10:17 AM, Qiuping Yi wrote: > > Thank you. But now I am using LLVM 2.9, so which version of poolalloc I

On 1/30/15 11:32 PM, Qiuping Yi wrote: > Hi, John Criswell > > Thank you very much. > > I am installing LLVM-3.2, but I encounter the next error when carrying > out "make": Is this error occurring when compiling the version of Clang within SAFECode or standard Clang? If it's the former, you should know that you don't need to compile SAFECode to use

Hi, all I want to use the alias analysises in project poolalloc, but I encounter some problem during installing it. I install poolalloc as follow: 1) cd llvm/projects svn co http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/poolalloc/branches/release_32 poolalloc 3) cd LLVM-object-directory make tools-only cd projects/poolalloc make When I carried out "make", I get the next error

On 1/30/15 10:17 AM, Qiuping Yi wrote: > Thank you. But now I am using LLVM 2.9, so which version of > poolalloc I should use ? Why are you using LLVM 2.9? That's an old version of LLVM (even by my standards). Is there some other LLVM-based tool that requires that you use LLVM 2.9? Regards, John Criswell > > > -------------------------------------------- > Qiuping Yi

On 1/30/15 10:24 AM, Qiuping Yi wrote: > I am just not upgrade my LLVM. So I must use some higer LLVM version, > right? Yes. For working with poolalloc, I would recommend using LLVM 3.2 as we know poolalloc compiles with LLVM 3.2. If there's a release_29 branch for poolalloc, you could use that, but you won't get any bug fixes that we added between poolalloc 2.9 and poolalloc

Dear Qiuping, If you use the release_32 branch of poolalloc, then you need to use LLVM 3.2. For directions on compiling poolalloc with LLVM 3.2, please the SAFECode build directions at http://safecode.cs.illinois.edu/docs/Install.html. You can just skip the steps in the directions that compile SAFECode. Regards, John Criswell On 1/30/15 10:05 AM, Qiuping Yi wrote: > Hi, all > > I

Which compiler are you using to compile poolalloc? Looks like it doesn't support C++11 (doesn't recognize nullptr). Jingyue On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Qiuping Yi <yiqiuping at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, John Criswell > > Thank you very much. > > I am installing LLVM-3.2, but I encounter the next error when carrying out > "make": > > llvm[3]:

Hi John, On 25 May 2016 at 16:11, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Pierre, > > Stepping up a level, what is your goal in replacing calls to malloc() and > free()? Is it any different than what SAFECode, SoftBound, or ASan do? > That's a good question. I didn't knew about SoftBound until now, so thank you for the name =). Anyway here is what I