similar to: UBSan, StringRef and Allocator.h

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi all > > (No idea if I have the correct audience. Please CC more people as needed). > > I have an UBSan failure in BumpPtrAllocatorImpl.Allocate. > > The problem is that lld requests that we StringRef::copy an empty string. > This passes a length of 0 to a

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:35 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com <mailto:peter_cooper at apple.com>> wrote: > Hi all > > (No idea if I have the correct audience. Please CC more people as needed). > > I have an UBSan failure in

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com> wrote: > Hi all > > (No idea if I have the correct audience. Please CC more people as needed). > > I have an UBSan failure in BumpPtrAllocatorImpl.Allocate. > > The problem is that lld requests that we StringRef::copy an empty string. > This passes a length of 0 to a BumpPtrAllocator. The

FWIW, I agree with Mehdi that we should just assert that our types don't get called with size zero. That said, I don't think we can be terribly cavalier with what we expect from standard allocator types, operator new, or malloc. And so I would expect LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_RETURNS_NOALIAS to not imply NONNULL, and while it seems reasonable to put NONNULL on *our* allocate function because of the

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:39 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:35 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com <mailto:peter_cooper at

> On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> On Mar 28, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com <mailto:chandlerc at google.com>> wrote: >> >> FWIW, I agree with Mehdi that we should just assert that our types don't get called with size zero. > Yeah, I agree. I’ve

> On Mar 28, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > FWIW, I agree with Mehdi that we should just assert that our types don't get called with size zero. Yeah, I agree. I’ve tried running the tests with the assert in place and there’s about 1000 failures across llvm/clang. I’ll see what I can fix as I would like to get these to behave. There

On 03/29/2016 01:59 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev wrote: > >> On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Mar 28, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com >>> <mailto:chandlerc at google.com>> wrote:

> On Mar 29, 2016, at 4:45 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > > On 03/29/2016 01:59 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev wrote: >> >>> On Mar 28, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 28, 2016, at

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:57 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> Hi all >> >> (No idea if I have the correct audience. Please CC more people as needed). >> >> I have an UBSan

In a code segment of my pass plugin, I try to gather AliasSets for all StoreInst, LoadInst and CallInst instructions in a function. Some behaviors of the pass puzzled me. Below is the *.ll of the test program which I run the pass on, it was get with "llvm-gcc -Wl,--disable-opt" from a rather simple *.c program. ---------------------------------- ; ModuleID = 'ptralias.bc'

On 18 Oct 2015, at 23:08, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Supporting only basic block level granularity for "try ranges" may not > be sufficient for Java -- if a basic block has more than one null check > in it then throwing the NullPtrException for the first null check (if > it fails) is semantically different from throwing the

Oh, I appologize that I should not have asked about __main() ---- it appears in FAQ. But the question remains that why call to __main() can alias stack location? I think the memory location pointed by data_X pointers are not visible to __main(). In comparison, calls to printf() do not have similar effect. On 5/14/06, Nai Xia <nelson.xia at gmail.com> wrote: > > In a code segment of

Hi Chris, I took a haste look at the "Points-to Analysis in Almost Linear Time" by Steens , your PHD thesis and SteensGaard.cpp in LLVM this afternoon. So I think: 1. Actually the basic algorithm described originally by SteensGaard does not provide MOD/REF information for functions. 2. The context insensitive part of Data Structure Analysis (LocalAnalysis) can be deemed as an

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > However, I didn't quite understand your point about may-throw -- how > > is may-throw different from a generic side-effect (volatile store, > > syscall etc.)? All of those can't be hoisted or sunk -- we have to >

On Tuesday 16 May 2006 03:19, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2006, Nai Xia wrote: > > > In other words, if I only use -steens-aa and the data_XXXs are all > > external global variables( and so inComplete ), > > Sounds right! > > > the call to printf will > > make the same effect, which I have tested it. > > > > Am I right ? :) >

I won’t be able to attend, but I’d be interested in hearing if any conclusions are reached on several of these topics: > On 16 Oct 2015, at 21:27, Joe Ranieri via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > - Dealing with the explosion of basic blocks that come up with > languages where almost every function call, implicit and explicit, can > raise exceptions. This

On Wed, 17 May 2006, Nai Xia wrote: > Unfortunately, I did not locate the lines in steens-aa for "printf" special case. > In ds-aa, I found the lines below: Right, steens-aa and ds-aa share code for "local analysis", they just stitch it together into an interprocedural analysis in different ways. The code below is used for steens-aa. >

On Mon, 15 May 2006, Nai Xia wrote: > In other words, if I only use -steens-aa and the data_XXXs are all > external global variables( and so inComplete ), Sounds right! > the call to printf will > make the same effect, which I have tested it. > > Am I right ? :) If you've tested it then, yes you're right :). I haven't played with this stuff for a long time,

Hi, llvm::BumpPtrAllocatorImpl::Reset() looks like it has a bug. There is this check at the top: if (Slabs.empty()) return; But what if you don't have any normal Slabs allocated but only CustomSizedSlabs. I think this should be: if (Slabs.empty() && CustomSizedSlabs.empty()) return;