<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/26/18 2:01 AM, Alexey Knyshev
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAM5izQvLHivLQSetYNkm+72P4A1GP+1u67Td64Q-FHS6Aobx0w@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi all,<br>
<br>
</div>
During last few days I was working on std::shared_ptr
constructor modeling and trying to understand how path
sensitive analysis works. After some time I faced unexpected
modelling of Call arguments SVals. Here is the portion of
code that caused analyzer behavior that I don't understand:<br>
<br>
<div style="margin-left:40px">auto del =
std::default_delete<S>();<br>
return std::shared_ptr<S>((S*)malloc(sizeof(S)),
del);<br>
<br>
</div>
The case I observed: first argument SVal is modeled properly
and I can get RegionState info from program state (provided
by MallocChecker). The second one (del symbol) is unknown
(DelSVal.dump() shows me that). On the other hand, the
following code doesn't cause such problem and prints
'&code{free}' as expected:<br>
<br>
<div style="margin-left:40px">const auto &del = free;<br>
return std::shared_ptr<S>((S*)malloc(sizeof(S)),
del);<br>
<br>
</div>
So, the question is: what can cause such imprecise modeling
of SVal (Deleter - second constructor arg)?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
"Well," said Owl, "the customary procedure in such cases is as
follows:"<br>
<br>
1. View the exploded graph in GraphViz (as described in
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/checker_dev_manual.html#visualizing">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/checker_dev_manual.html#visualizing</a>).<br>
2. Find the top-most node on it that has incorrect or missing info.<br>
3. Does the node have a checker tag at the bottom? If so, find the
respective code that adds transitions in the checker.<br>
4. Otherwise see what statement is being evaluated at this node. The
code you're interested in lies somewhere within ExprEngine::Visit()
for the respective statement kind.<br>
5. Put a breakpoint in the code you've found and debug step-by-step
until you see the problem.<br>
<br>
Exploded graph is quite overwhelming at first, but it's not as hard
as it looks.<br>
<br>
In your case the call argument is an UnknownVal - which means that
you know that we couldn't evaluate argument expression. If you're
not sure what kind of expression it is, consult the -ast-dump. The
(last) node that evaluates that expression would not contain the
value for the expression (because UnknownVal is dropped in
Environment - but not in Store). If any of its sub-expressions are
also incorrectly dropped, you might want to look at them first.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAM5izQvLHivLQSetYNkm+72P4A1GP+1u67Td64Q-FHS6Aobx0w@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>P.S. I've changed shared_ptr constructor declaration in
'test/Analysis/Inputs/system-header-simulator-cxx-std-suppression.h':<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You should only use these simulators for regression testing. They're
simplified standard library headers that try to be as accurate as
possible but don't guarantee that. After all, For your actual
development, you should use the real system headers, because that's
what the users will care about, and then try to update the
simulators to simulate them as closely as you need.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAM5izQvLHivLQSetYNkm+72P4A1GP+1u67Td64Q-FHS6Aobx0w@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
<div style="margin-left:40px">shared_ptr(_Tp* __p,
void(*deleter)(void*))<br>
<br>
</div>
to<br>
<br>
<div style="margin-left:40px">template<class Deleter><br>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:40px">shared_ptr(_Tp* __p, Deleter d)<br>
<br>
</div>
and I don't understand why it was declared with function
pointer argument instead template. But looks like it isn't the
source of my problem <span id="gmail-result_box"
class="gmail-short_text" lang="en"><span class="gmail-">at
first sight</span></span>.<br>
<br>
</div>
Regards, Alexey K<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2018-03-20 0:37 GMT+03:00 Artem
Dergachev <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class=""><br>
<br>
On 17/03/2018 7:25 AM, Alexey Knyshev wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
This should already be supported by MallocChecker -
i.e. it warns<br>
when you allocate memory with, say, new() and
release it with<br>
free() or delete[]().<br>
<br>
If methods of a smart pointer are "inlined" during
analysis, these<br>
bugs will already be caught automatically.<br>
<br>
<br>
I took a look at your recent work & status report
posted there in mailing lists. And I have a question
about how it would work in particular cases, e.g.:<br>
1. Returning smart_ptr by value from function that has
it's implementation in analyzed translation unit but it
isn't called from any other function in the same TU.<br>
<br>
std::shared_ptr<S> createInstance() {<br>
return std::shared_ptr<S>(new S, free);<br>
}<br>
<br>
If I understand correctly, compiler is free to apply
copy-elison optimization on shared_ptr which is returned
by value. So destructor call won't be modeled properly
because it's not inlined during analysis. And bug won't
be caught.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span>
Indeed, the tempting - but risky - thing to do here is to
declare construction of "std::shared_ptr<S>(new S,
free);" to be a bug on its own. It is risky because it
leaves us with a checker that finds non-bugs; there is a
chance that the destructor will never be called while the
pointer is still being owned by the shared_ptr. Such code
would be ridiculous but at the same time we wouldn't like to
drive away users who had to write this to work around an
equally ridiculous proprietary API that they have no way of
changing.<br>
<br>
In this particular case i'd have tried to take the risk,
keeping in mind that i might end up rewriting the checker
back to the conservative behavior of only warning at the
destructor.<br>
<br>
Note that copy elision is irrelevant, because in any case we
won't free() the pointer at the return site, because
reference count will never reach zero within the function.
That's the whole point of the shared pointer.<span class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
2. As you mentioned before, report would be fired only
if constructor and destructor have been inlined (which
is not guaranteed to be done). As the result such check
won't work in general case.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span>
Yeah, that's pretty much the primary motivation for making
an API-specific checker. It's not super strong in this case
because this would likely give a very slight increase over
the existing coverage.<br>
<br>
In this case, however, the much more important motivation is
to avoid false positives that occur when we don't know the
original reference count of a shared pointer that was
constructed before analysis has started - and we start
"assuming..." that any destructor of a shared pointer could
release memory. This is currently planned to be suppressed
in a fairly gross manner (<a
href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D44281" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://reviews.llvm.org/D442<wbr>81</a>).
For this reason we believe that having explicit modeling for
various smart pointers is a must.<span class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Actually my point is about modeling smart pointers
behavior specifically and don't inline any calls to
constructor / destructor & methods those modeled by
checker. And the question immediately arises: is there
way to control inline policy?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span>
It is indeed possible to make the checker "take over"
function call modeling by subscribing on the `eval::Call`
callback. In this case both inlining and conservative
evaluation by the core are avoided, and the checker who
evaluates the call is responsible for modeling *all* effects
of the call (because two checkers cannot evalCall the same
call, even though they can do the usual
checkPreCall/checkPostCall thingy as much as they want).<br>
<br>
There is also the BodyFarm mechanism (which allows you to
mock simplified ASTs for standard functions) but you DO NOT
WANT to use it for C++ because it'd take you forever to
construct the correct C++ AST with templates manually.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">
And sorry for any possible misunderstanding from my side
as I'm not quite familiar with CSA internals.<br>
<br>
Regards, Alexey K<br>
<br>
</span>
2018-03-17 5:21 GMT+03:00 Artem Dergachev <<a
href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>>>:<span
class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 16/03/2018 12:30 PM, Alexey Knyshev wrote:<br>
<br>
Sorry, accidentally removed part of message
before sending.<br>
<br>
Aleksei,<br>
<br>
Could you share your ideas of checker
design? It is<br>
possible that<br>
problems you met can be solved in different
(maybe even<br>
better)<br>
way if we know the whole picture.<br>
<br>
<br>
I'm currently have no clear idea how to
implement it in the<br>
"right manner". But first of all I would aim to
track the<br>
origin (malloc, new, new [], etc) of SVal and
check if Deleter<br>
is the expected corresponding way to deallocate
such SVal.<br>
<br>
<br>
This should already be supported by MallocChecker -
i.e. it warns<br>
when you allocate memory with, say, new() and
release it with<br>
free() or delete[]().<br>
<br>
If methods of a smart pointer are "inlined" during
analysis, these<br>
bugs will already be caught automatically.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards, Alexey K<br>
<br>
2018-03-16 22:22 GMT+03:00 Alexey Knyshev<br>
<<a href="mailto:alexey.knyshev@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">alexey.knyshev@gmail.com</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:alexey.knyshev@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">alexey.knyshev@gmail.c<wbr>om</a>><br>
</span>
<mailto:<a
href="mailto:alexey.knyshev@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">alexey.knyshev@gmail.c<wbr>om</a>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<mailto:<a
href="mailto:alexey.knyshev@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">alexey.knyshev@gmail.c<wbr>om</a>>>>:<br>
<br>
Hello guys,<br>
<br>
And thanks for your attention<br>
<br>
Aleksei,<br>
<br>
Could you share your ideas of checker
design? It is<br>
possible<br>
that problems you met can be solved in
different<br>
(maybe even<br>
better) way if we know the whole
picture.<br>
<br>
<br>
As I said, I'm interested in improving
current state of<br>
dynamic<br>
memory modeling. Especially stuff related
to smart<br>
pointers (e.g.<br>
shared, unique) which also mentioned in
list of potential<br>
checkers<br>
as smartptr.SmartPtrInit<br>
<<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.o<wbr>rg/potential_checkers.html</a><br>
<<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.o<wbr>rg/potential_checkers.html</a>>>*<br>
<br>
*<br>
<br>
**You can see an example of how state
trait is exported in<br>
GenericTaintChecker or MPIChecker.
Generally, you just<br>
create<br>
a named ProgramStateTrait in the
header.<br>
<br>
<br>
Briefly looked at MPITypes.h. Does it mean
we should move<br>
RegionState to separate file and register
it via Traits in the<br>
same manner to make it avaliable from
other checkers (not<br>
other TU<br>
as mentioned in ento::mpi::RequestMap)?<br>
<br>
<br>
GenericTaintChecker is made in a fairly intrusive
manner by<br>
putting stuff into the program state class
directly, which isn't<br>
very sane. I'd definitely prefer something similar
to dynamic type<br>
propagation (see DynamicTypeMap.cpp,
DynamicTypeMap.h). You can<br>
use the usual REGISTER_MAP_WITH_PROGRAMSTATE
(etc.) macros in the<br>
.cpp file as long as you provide accessor methods
declared in the<br>
.h file that other checkers could include.<br>
<br>
<br>
Artem,<br>
<br>
you need to keep all of this in mind
when writing a<br>
checker.<br>
<br>
<br>
Sure, but on the other hand I think it's
possible to<br>
implement and<br>
improve modeling of various API calls'
effects<br>
step-by-step. Let's<br>
say, it case of SmartPtrInit checker
mentioned before the bare<br>
minimum would be modeling of construction
(and destruction to<br>
avoid leak report from existing related
checkers).<br>
<br>
which is why the few experimental C++
checkers that we<br>
currently have required heavy hacks to
become<br>
possible. But<br>
for now you'd rather keep an eye on
these problems.<br>
<br>
<br>
Does it mean it's better to wait a bit for
Core<br>
improvements from<br>
main contributors? Does it make sense to
make an efforts to<br>
implement SmartPtrItnit checker in current
state of things?<br>
<br>
<br>
You should feel free to start working on the
checker in an<br>
incremental manner (everything is better in an
incremental<br>
manner!), but in some cases i may prefer improving
the checker API<br>
or fixing core modeling bugs instead of writing
large portions of<br>
checker code to work around inconvenient APIs or
bugs, and this is<br>
something i might not be immediately capable of
doing myself (due<br>
to being busy with other things), which may
potentially delay your<br>
progress.<br>
<br>
Thanks in advance and regards,<br>
Alexey K<br>
<br>
2018-03-16 21:47 GMT+03:00 Artem Dergachev<br>
<<a href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>><br>
</div>
</div>
<mailto:<a
href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>>>><wbr>:
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
Dynamic memory management is pretty
much done at this<br>
point -<br>
we have very good support for
malloc()-like stuff and<br>
reasonably good support for operator
new() (support for<br>
operator new[]() is currently missing
because it requires<br>
calling an indefinite number of
constructors which is<br>
not yet<br>
implemented). There is also a known
issue with custom<br>
operator<br>
new(...) returning null pointers - in
this case we<br>
should not<br>
be calling the constructor but for now
we evaluate the<br>
constructor conservatively.<br>
<br>
Your real problem will be managing
smart pointers<br>
themselves<br>
because they are C++ objects that have
a myriad of<br>
methods,<br>
they can be copied, moved, assigned,
move-assigned, they<br>
destroyed, they lifetime-extended, you
need to keep all of<br>
this in mind when writing a checker.
This is slowly<br>
getting<br>
easier because i'm currently working
on that, but until<br>
recently it wasn't working correctly
in the core, let<br>
alone<br>
checkers, which is why the few
experimental C++<br>
checkers that<br>
we currently have required heavy hacks
to become<br>
possible. But<br>
for now you'd rather keep an eye on
these problems.<br>
<br>
On 16/03/2018 3:57 AM, Aleksei Sidorin
via cfe-dev wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi Alexey!<br>
<br>
Could you share your ideas of
checker design? It is<br>
possible that problems you met can
be solved in<br>
different<br>
(maybe even better) way if we know
the whole picture.<br>
Regarding your questions, you can
find some<br>
answers below.<br>
<br>
1. a) The first way for checker
communication is<br>
to share<br>
their program state trait. You can
see an example<br>
of how<br>
state trait is exported in
GenericTaintChecker or<br>
MPIChecker. Generally, you just
create a named<br>
ProgramStateTrait in the header.
You can take a<br>
look at<br>
TaintManager.h and MPITypes.h and
how they are used.<br>
b) To set a dependency from
another checker, you<br>
can just<br>
register it while registering your
checker. An<br>
example can<br>
be found in MallocChecker where
register$Checker also<br>
calls registerCStringCheckerBasic
to register a<br>
checker it<br>
depends on.<br>
As you pointed, inter-checker
communication can<br>
become a<br>
source of some problems. Most of
them are discussed in<br>
this conversation:<br>
<a
href="http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-Design-idea-separate-modelling-from-checking-td4059122.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://clang-developers.42468.<wbr>n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-Des<wbr>ign-idea-separate-modelling-<wbr>from-checking-td4059122.html</a><br>
<<a
href="http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-Design-idea-separate-modelling-from-checking-td4059122.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://clang-developers.42468<wbr>.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-<wbr>Design-idea-separate-modelling<wbr>-from-checking-td4059122.html</a>><br>
<br>
<<a
href="http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-Design-idea-separate-modelling-from-checking-td4059122.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://clang-developers.42468<wbr>.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-<wbr>Design-idea-separate-modelling<wbr>-from-checking-td4059122.html</a><br>
<<a
href="http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-Design-idea-separate-modelling-from-checking-td4059122.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://clang-developers.42468<wbr>.n3.nabble.com/analyzer-RFC-<wbr>Design-idea-separate-modelling<wbr>-from-checking-td4059122.html</a>><wbr>><br>
<br>
2. I think there is nothing bad in
sharing RegionState<br>
across checkers in the way shown
in 1a.<br>
<br>
3. Artem Dergachev has done some
excellent work on<br>
improvement of operator 'new'
processing in CSA<br>
engine.<br>
Regarding checkers, I can see some
on<br>
<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.or<wbr>g/potential_checkers.html</a><br>
<<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.o<wbr>rg/potential_checkers.html</a>><br>
<br>
<<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.o<wbr>rg/potential_checkers.html</a><br>
<<a
href="https://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/potential_checkers.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://clang-analyzer.llvm.o<wbr>rg/potential_checkers.html</a>>>:<br>
for example,
undefbehavior.AutoptrsOwnSameO<wbr>bj. You can<br>
search this list to find more.<br>
<br>
<br>
15.03.2018 23:54, Alexey Knyshev
via cfe-dev пишет:<br>
<br>
Hi there!<br>
<br>
While thinking about how it
would be possible to<br>
implement various smart ptr
related checkers I<br>
tried<br>
to review current state of
MallocChecker and<br>
came up<br>
with that it would be great to
have<br>
RegionState info<br>
available to other checkers.
Could you please<br>
share<br>
your points of view and
comments on the following<br>
statements / questions:<br>
<br>
1. Is there any right way for
chaining<br>
checkers? How<br>
they are expected to
communicate between each<br>
other<br>
(excluding generation of nodes
/<br>
ProgramStates). I've<br>
heard that there are couple of
problems caused by<br>
inlining functions,
constructors / descructors.<br>
2. What do you think about
moving RegionState<br>
to the<br>
Core of CSA or providing
optional extended info in<br>
MemRegion about the source of
such region (new<br>
opearator / array new, malloc,
alloca, etc). So it<br>
would be available to all
checkers.<br>
3. Is there any roadmap for
CSA and especially for<br>
dynamic memory management
modeling & related<br>
checkers?<br>
<br>
Regards, Alexey K<br>
<br>
-- <a
href="http://linkedin.com/profile" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">linkedin.com/profile</a><br>
</div>
</div>
<<a href="http://linkedin.com/profile"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://linkedin.com/profile</a>>
<<a href="http://linkedin.com/profile" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://linkedin.com/profile</a>><span
class=""><br>
<br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a><br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a>><br>
<br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a><br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a>>>><br>
<br>
<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">github.com/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>><br>
<<a
href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>>><br>
<<a
href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>><br>
<<a
href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>>>><br>
<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://bitbucket.org/alexeykn<wbr>yshev</a>><br>
</span>
<<a
href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://bitbucket.org/alexeykn<wbr>yshev</a><span
class=""><br>
<<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://bitbucket.org/alexeykn<wbr>yshev</a>>><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a>><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a>>>><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
cfe-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><wbr>><br>
</span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><wbr>>><span
class=""><br>
<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a>><br>
<br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a>>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- Best regards,<br>
Aleksei Sidorin,<br>
SRR, Samsung Electronics<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
cfe-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><wbr>><br>
</span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><wbr>>><br>
<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a>><br>
<br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
<<a
href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin<wbr>/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a>>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <a href="http://linkedin.com/profile"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">linkedin.com/profile</a>
<<a href="http://linkedin.com/profile" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://linkedin.com/profile</a>><span
class=""><br>
<br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a><br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a>>><br>
<br>
<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">github.com/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>>><br>
<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev</a><br>
<<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://bitbucket.org/alexeykn<wbr>yshev</a>><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a>>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <a href="http://linkedin.com/profile"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">linkedin.com/profile</a> <<a
href="http://linkedin.com/profile" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://linkedin.com/profile</a>><br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a><br>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a>>><br>
<br>
<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">github.com/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a><br>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>>><br>
<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev</a><br>
<<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://bitbucket.org/alexeykn<wbr>yshev</a>><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a><br>
<<a
href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a>>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span class="">
-- <br>
<a href="http://linkedin.com/profile" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">linkedin.com/profile</a>
<<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/prof<wbr>ile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBtei<wbr>QnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw</a>><br>
<br>
<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">github.com/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://github.com/alexeyknysh<wbr>ev</a>><br>
<a href="http://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev</a>
<<a href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://bitbucket.org/alexeyk<wbr>nyshev/</a>><br>
</span></blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr"><a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=AAMAABn6oKQBDhBteiQnWsYm-S9yxT7wQkfWhSw"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">linkedin.com/profile</a><br>
<br>
<a href="http://github.com/alexeyknyshev" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">github.com/alexeyknyshev</a><span></span><span></span><br>
<a href="https://bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">bitbucket.org/alexeyknyshev</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>