similar to: llvm-dev Digest, Vol 136, Issue 22

Thanks for the fast response John. On Thu, Oct 1, 2015, at 04:51 PM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear Ed, > > First, someone has updated the DSA code in the poolalloc project to LLVM > 3.7, and a Master's student worked for me over the summer to update a > large chunk of SAFECode to LLVM 3.7. However, the update to LLVM 3.7 > isn't finished (we need to finish integrating

Hi, I'm trying to get the pool allocator and safe code building against llvm trunk. I've run into a build error, and I see that in the past another user was told just not to build the pool allocator for use with safecode [1]. However, I really want the pool allocator transforms, so I just wanted to check why the suggestion was not to use it. Has it been superseded in some way by something

Devang Patel wrote: > On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Marc de Kruijf wrote: > > I'd like to write a pass that does both: implements a code transformation and saves information that can be accessed by subsequent passes. > > Ideally, we want to use two separate pass. However, it is quiet possible that your requirement is unique. Would it be possible to provide more info. on what

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

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, 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

Patrick Alexander Simmons wrote: > I don't really have a specific question, but, as I've been looking > through pool allocation and the DS graphs extensively, I wanted to > verify that my understanding of the representations used is correct. > Therefore, I'm summarizing my understanding below (which, if it's > correct, may hopefully be helpful to others). I

I don't really have a specific question, but, as I've been looking through pool allocation and the DS graphs extensively, I wanted to verify that my understanding of the representations used is correct. Therefore, I'm summarizing my understanding below (which, if it's correct, may hopefully be helpful to others). I would appreciate if someone who understands pool allocation

Hello All, I am looking at exploring what benefits SAFECode has to offer over clang S.A and llvm's instrumentation tools like memory sanitizer and address sanitizer. I could come up with the following that are not provided in ASAN/MSAN/Clang S.A -> dangling pointer error and detection -> crashes in system libraries due to security vulnerabilities. In the process, I wanted to run the

Hi John, That worked for me. I am using llvm 3.2 only and following http://safecode.cs.illinois.edu/docs/Install.html So for I am able to make inside llvm/projects/poolalloc by doing such cosmetic changes. Now, when I tried to make inside llvm/projects/safecode, I see another error. kpawar at KPAWAR-LT ~/SAFECode/LLVM_SRC/llvm/projects/safecode $ /usr/bin/clang -cc1 -triple

On 2/26/15 9:54 AM, Jyoti Rajendra Allur wrote: > Hello All, > I am looking at exploring what benefits SAFECode has to offer over clang S.A and llvm's instrumentation tools like memory sanitizer and address sanitizer. Are you looking for an off-the-shelf tool, or are you looking for approaches to use in your own tool? > I could come up with the following that are not provided in

Török Edwin wrote: > [snip] > > I applied the attached patch to make it compile on my box (Debian > x86_64), only to find out that x86_64 is not supported :( > This architecture is not supported by the pool allocator! > Aborted > Thanks for the patch. What options do I give to the patch command to apply it to the source code? Although there's no documentation about

Thank you, and I apologize for conflating the two passes. My main remaining concern is about what happens when there is a node in a function's DSGraph that points to a pool (or pools, if there are multiple callers) that is not in the DSGraph of that function. For example, on page 3 of the 2005 PLDI paper, the DSGraph given for createnode(), Data is pointing to an unlabeled node in the

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 Criswell wrote: > You can use the -debug-pass=Arguments option to opt to print out which > DSA passes it is using. > > -- John T. > The argument list was this: -dsa-local -dsa-stdlib -dsa-bu -dsa-eqtd -poolalloc -preverify -domtree -verify So, the last DSA pass done would appear to have been "-dsa-eqtd". Does this mean pool allocation is using TDeq and not BUeq

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

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.

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

SVA/safecode looks interesting. Is it available to play with? I grepped for strings such as "sva" "secure" "safecode" in the LLVM source tree and didn't find anything, nor did I see obvious links to implementations from the project web pages. In the short term, questions I'd be interested in answering are: What happens when embedded codes that I care

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