[LLVMdev] New kind of metadata to capture LLVM IR linking structure

[Yuanfang Chen]

Just saying, maybe ask the build system to dump comprising files for a
library?
On Mar 23, 2015 10:36 AM, "Khilan Gudka" <Khilan.Gudka at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> Another example is libbrowser (from chromium) that includes sources files
> from chrome/browser but also chrome/third_party/mozilla_security_manager.
>
> It would be nice to have a way of reliably identifying which compilation
> units were part of a library, which is what we were trying to achieve with
> MDLLVMModule but if there are better abstractions then am all for that.
>
>
> --
> Khilan Gudka
> Research Associate
> Security Group
> Computer Laboratory
> University of Cambridge
> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~kg365/
>
> On 23 March 2015 at 17:24, Khilan Gudka <Khilan.Gudka at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> Yes we did consider using directory paths to identify libraries, however
>> there are cases where this doesn't work. For example, chromium builds a
>> libcommon which mostly consists of source files from the folder
>> chrome/commom/..., but it also contains the
>> file components/nacl/common/pnacl_types.cc (although, other files in that
>> folder are not part of libcommon).
>>
>> --
>> Khilan Gudka
>> Research Associate
>> Security Group
>> Computer Laboratory
>> University of Cambridge
>> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~kg365/
>>
>> On 23 March 2015 at 16:52, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:50 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Khilan Gudka <
>>>> Khilan.Gudka at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi David
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your email.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the benefit/purpose of the MDLLVMModule over just having the
>>>>>> MDCompileUnits themselves? I would imagine the user cares about which
>>>>>> source file the problem was in (obtained from the MDCompileUnit), not the
>>>>>> sequence of BC modules that may've been built into?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We envisage it to be useful when an analysis tool built using LLVM
>>>>> needs to know which MDCompileUnits were part of a particular library that
>>>>> has been linked in. For instance, we're currently analysing the sandboxing
>>>>> behaviour within the Chromium web browser, which comprises hundreds of
>>>>> internal libraries and many external ones. To be able to perform this
>>>>> analysis  we have to link them all together into a single .bc/.ll file.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having the module structure allows us to model interactions between
>>>>> different modules (without manually (and sometimes unreliably) having to
>>>>> work out which source file corresponds to which library (e.g. libssl,
>>>>> libpci, libpolicy, librenderer, etc)). It also allows an analysis tool to
>>>>> support turning on/off output warnings for particular libraries (as they
>>>>> can lead to a lot of analysis output).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fair enough - I've no idea/opinion on whether that's the right
>>>> abstraction (other people with more domain knowledge of analysis
>>>> infrastructure might chime in with some thoughts).
>>>>
>>>> Practically speaking: would directory paths be sufficient? The
>>>> MDCompileUnits already have information about where the source file was.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I agree, this seems very weird. You have very good source location
>>> information down to directory/file/line/column for individual instructions
>>> in the existing metadata scheme, I'm not sure what this is getting you over
>>> that?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would be very grateful if someone could review this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Khilan Gudka
>>>>>>> Research Associate
>>>>>>> Security Group
>>>>>>> Computer Laboratory
>>>>>>> University of Cambridge
>>>>>>> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~kg365/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>>>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20150323/61020b6d/attachment.html>