On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:19:24PM +0300, Marat Zakirov wrote:
> We didn't find reasonable performance gains to use VRP in asan. But even if
> we found we couldn't use it because it is not safe for asan. It make some
> optimistic conclusions invalid for asan.
>
> Adjusted VRP memory upper bound is
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
> On 10/30/2014 02:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 02:16:04PM +0300, Yury Gribov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, VRP is not path-insensitive - it is the value-ranges we are
On 10/30/2014 04:19 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
On 10/30/2014 02:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 02:16:04PM +0300, Yury Gribov wrote:
On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, VRP is not path-insensitive - it is the value-ranges we are able
to retain after removing t
On 10/30/2014 02:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 02:16:04PM +0300, Yury Gribov wrote:
On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, VRP is not path-insensitive - it is the value-ranges we are able
to retain after removing the ASSERT_EXPRs VRP inserts.
Why can't you do
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 02:16:04PM +0300, Yury Gribov wrote:
> On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >Well, VRP is not path-insensitive - it is the value-ranges we are able
> >to retain after removing the ASSERT_EXPRs VRP inserts.
> >
> >Why can't you do the ASAN optimizations in the VRP
On 10/30/2014 01:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, VRP is not path-insensitive - it is the value-ranges we are able
to retain after removing the ASSERT_EXPRs VRP inserts.
Why can't you do the ASAN optimizations in the VRP transform phase?
I think this is not Asan-specific: Marat's point was t
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> During asan performance tunning we tried to use VRP and found that it is
> path-insensitive and thus suboptimal. In example bellow "i" has VRP range
> 0..1000 across whole program but in loop body it is just 0..999.
>
> int a[10
Hi folks!
During asan performance tunning we tried to use VRP and found that it is
path-insensitive and thus suboptimal. In example bellow "i" has VRP
range 0..1000 across whole program but in loop body it is just 0..999.
int a[1000];
void foo ()
{
for (int i=0;i<1000;i++)
a[i] = 0;
