similar to: [LLVMdev] interprocedural static backwards slicing

Dear Jin, I've talked with Vikram, and we agree that having this code (and a dynamic backwards slicing pass that Swarup and I wrote) in a publicly available SVN repository is a good thing. I'll try to get you a copy of the static slicing code some time next week (I should be able to work on it Monday morning) so that you can start working with it right away. I can work on making a

Thanks John. I appreciate your help and I look forward to obtaining the code. A proper LLVM sub-project: No rush on this and please take your time. Thanks. - Jin -----Original Message----- From: Criswell, John T [mailto:criswell at illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2011 11:58 AM To: Jinwook Shin; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: RE: interprocedural static backwards slicing Dear Jin,

On 10/9/11 12:12 AM, Jinwook Shin wrote: > Thanks John. I appreciate your help and I look forward to obtaining the code. > > A proper LLVM sub-project: No rush on this and please take your time. Thanks. Okay, I've created a new LLVM sub-project called Giri(*). It currently contains only the static backwards slicing pass. I'll add the dynamic slicing code to the project later.

Thanks John for the super quick checkin. I was a little surprised here. Yesterday/today I spent some time trying to build poolalloc on my mac dev machine. Unfortunately, it failed to build [1]. Looks like the compiler can't find the header files under /usr/include/c++. I also tried to build on my linux box and saw the same problem. giri built successfully. Are you sure poolalloc builds on

On 10/11/11 5:05 PM, Jinwook Shin wrote: > Thanks John for the super quick checkin. I was a little surprised here. Creating a new project was easy, and it seemed the easiest way to send the code to you. :) > > Yesterday/today I spent some time trying to build poolalloc on my mac dev > machine. Unfortunately, it failed to build [1]. Can you do a make VERBOSE=1 and send me the

Dear all, Is anyone aware of any implementation of an inter procedural slicing algorithm for LLVM? I am mostly interested in a static algorithm but a dynamic one can be helpful too. Thanks, Silviu Ganceanu Research Student, Ecole Polytechique Federale de Luasanne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello, I am curious to know if LLVM offers any passes to do interprocedural slicing, I need to eliminate most of the computations(possibly all, if they don't influence the control flow), but the control flow of the program should be maintained at all cost. I did see an optimization pass to print the CFG of a function without its body to a dot file, but I am interested in generating the

We have done a few class projects on static interprocedural slicing but they are all of "course project" quality. I will put you in touch with some of the students who did those, if you're interested? --Vikram Associate Professor, Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://llvm.org/~vadve On Aug 15, 2008, at 8:48 AM, Silviu-Ionut Ganceanu wrote:

Hi All, Are there any known implementations of static inter-procedural slicing for LLVM (especially forward slicing)? I did find a few references to it in the archives dating back to 2008, but am not sure what the current status is. Any pointers would be highly appreciated. Thanks Rohit Grad Student Middleware Security and Testing Group http://cs.wisc.edu/mist University of Wisconsin-Madison

On 6/26/12 5:07 PM, amruth.rd wrote: > Hello, > > I am curious to know if LLVM offers any passes to do interprocedural slicing, I need to eliminate most of the computations(possibly all, if they don't influence the control flow), but the control flow of the program should be maintained at all cost. I did see an optimization pass to print the CFG of a function without its body to a

Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do you still think it's a good idea to manually gather and link them with llvm-ld? I've seen other module pass

On 8/19/11 4:36 PM, Jinwook Shin (HOTWING) wrote: > > Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, > I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single > executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in > many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do > you still think it's a good idea

On 5/1/13 11:36 PM, Mingliang LIU wrote: > Hi all, > > I had a second thought of the dynamic slicing, as well as the source > code generating. > > Firstly, the dynamic slicing is very useful to software community > (I'll illustrate more in the refined proposal later), but it's already > implemented by Swarup and John Criswell from UIUC. The static slicing >

Hi all, I had a second thought of the dynamic slicing, as well as the source code generating. Firstly, the dynamic slicing is very useful to software community (I'll illustrate more in the refined proposal later), but it's already implemented by Swarup and John Criswell from UIUC. The static slicing code has been released as Giri project in LLVM, and they would kindly release the dynamic

Thanks John. I appreciate your help. I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've taken. John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could you take a look at Step 4) and tell me what you think? Thanks! 1) Create your own libLTO and

Hi, I'm trying to implement a module pass as a share object to process an entire program as a unit. The target program is built from multiple object files, hence multiple bitcode files. However, it seems that opt does not take the whole program, but just one bitcode file, "test.bc" in the example run shown below. $ opt -load mypass.dylib -mymodulepass < test.bc > /dev/null

On 7/12/11 4:11 PM, Jinwook Shin (HOTWING) wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm trying to implement a module pass as a share object to process an > entire program as a unit. The target program is built from multiple > object files, hence multiple bitcode files. However, it seems that opt > does not take the whole program, but just one bitcode file, "test.bc" > in the

On 9/22/11 4:04 PM, Jinwook Shin wrote: > Thanks John. I appreciate your help. De nada. > > I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For > those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've > taken. > > John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch > Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could

Hi, 1. How can I report a bug or commit a patch to the giri progject? I doubt this central commit list is the right place. 2. Are you still maintaining the giri project any more? Thank you. L On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:49 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 6/26/12 5:07 PM, amruth.rd wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I am curious to know if

Hi all, This is a GSoC 2013 proposal for LLVM project. Please see the formatted version at here: http://pacman.cs.tsinghua.edu.cn/~liuml07/files/gsoc2013-proposal-program-slicing.pdf Program slicing has been used in many applications, the criteria of which is a pair of statement and variables. I would like to write an inter-procedural program slicing pass in LLVM, which is able to calculate C