similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM Valgrind

i want to do something about llvm and valgrind.i have read some information about it in llvm.org. Port Valgrind <http://valgrind.org/> to use LLVM codegeneration and optimization passes instead of its own. is somebody working on it ? can you give me some addvice? is there some project like it? thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

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

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

Hi All , I'm not sure the question is relevant to the forum,My apologies if not We are trying to instrument our code with ASan(Clang) to find the memory errors and we see that the application execution halts when the Asan check finds the memory issue at the being. Which mean we need to fix the issue then compile and execute the instrumented code again to find the next issue and so on

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

Hi John and All, Thank you for the your inputs,we tried running Safecode with Liblto on our code base few weeks back,I'm very sorry to say this that we feel that safecode is not so stable and output is not so informative ,Please correct us if i'm wrong here. Thanks Again. ~Umesh On May 25, 2012 7:54 PM, "John Criswell" <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On

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

On 5/25/12 6:57 AM, Umesh Kalappa wrote: > Hi All , > > I'm not sure the question is relevant to the forum,My apologies if not > > We are trying to instrument our code with ASan(Clang) to find the > memory errors and we see that the application execution halts when > the Asan check finds the memory issue at the being. Which mean we need > to fix the issue then

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

Full_Name: Martin Schlather Version: 2.10.0 OS: linux Submission from: (NULL) (91.3.220.231) Bug summary: some functions behave differently for NAs when valgrind is used in R, e.g. sum and prod Bug demonstration: --- without valgrind ---- > sum(c(NA,1)[1]) [1] NA --- with valgrind ---- > sum(c(NA,1)[1]) [1] NaN R call with valgrind: R -d "valgrind --tool=memcheck

Hi Kostya, > [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false positive caused by > load widening] > > Once the Attribute::AddressSafety is set by clang (a separate patch), fixing > this bug may look as simple as this: I don't get the point of an attribute. There's plenty of code out there that does wide loads like this directly (without them being created by

Daniel, Kostya, We had a meeting with the Clang people (Chris, Doug, Ted) on Thursday before the llvmdev meeting about adding dynamic checking tools into Clang -- IOC for undefined integer behaviors, and SAFECode for memory safety. SAFECode has similar goals to AddressSanitizer, though at least for now it has more checks, but is slower. The main conclusion was that we should have a common

Hello, We've just released the first version of our LLVM-based address sanity checker: AddressSanitizer (http://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/). The tool finds out-of-bound and use-after-free bugs (the subset of bugs detectable by Valgrind/Memcheck); it consists of a LLVM compiler plugin which performs simple code instrumentation and a malloc replacement library. The main advantage of

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 Javed, On 06/18/10 14:07, Javed Absar wrote: > Hi: > I worked on loop-optimizations techniques previously using ORC. > Currently i see lots of research on speculative parallelization of > loops ... specially because multicores [for embedded systems] is > becoming popular. In other words, because you have > multiple cores, you can start some loops [Fast-Track] as if there is

Hi Tobias: Thanks for replying . So if I understand correctly, in LLVM currently, the Polyhedral model is being built ( LLVM IR -------> Poly Model ----------> LLVM IR ). This is for compile-time optimizations of loop-nests [e.g. loop-transformations to expose parallelism or improve locality etc]. Yes, thats great for optimizing loop-nests. As an additional, since the real value of LLVM

Thanks Reid/Jonathon for your replies. Reid, An important case against module level flags is that it wont allow changing or resetting section names e.g. int a; #pragma clang section bss = "xyz" int b; In case above, users would like to see only 'b' placed in 'xyz' and not 'a' as well. Link pointed to by Jonathon seems to require same behavior.

Dear LLVMers, We are happy to announce an alpha release of the SAFECode compiler. It is now available for download from the LLVM public Subversion repository. SAFECode uses a set of analysis passes and program transformations to provide strong memory safety guarantees to C/C++ programs. Specifically, the safety guarantees are: o Array bounds checking (prevents pointers from overflowing

Hi Nadav (and others who are related to this issue) - I saw some discussions on loop vectorizer that you are planning to write. Do you foresee using Polyhedral Framework (polly project) in some way in that. Thanks J. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121007/476abc1c/attachment.html>

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Kostya, > > > [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false positive > caused by > > load widening] > > > > Once the Attribute::AddressSafety is set by clang (a separate patch), > fixing > > this bug may look as simple as this: > > Hi Duncan, >