Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve multi-threaded UAF analysis and add SVComp result generation #1123
Improve multi-threaded UAF analysis and add SVComp result generation #1123
Changes from all commits
a57112b
0b3bfc9
77f7e89
cfef9bd
cbaffbb
c01585d
49a6d54
b02d0a7
50f20b0
c90fb0f
e28f72b
a054a4f
3271430
d49db71
034b0ab
68e1b71
cd95e8d
ba4d301
66f0c9d
5464636
049dc58
7adff2f
75f1580
cb29ecd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem with this is that the property file in SV-COMP doesn't contain just one, but all three at once: https://gitlab.com/sosy-lab/benchmarking/sv-benchmarks/-/blob/3d65c76d8521ef5bc79077a31e7b7e41dd077309/c/properties/valid-memsafety.prp.
But we can leave it for now if the idea is to at least test one of them specifically. I can do larger refactoring of the SV-COMP stuff to allow for multi-property.
It just means that as-is, this isn't ready for
valid-memsafety.prp
from SV-COMP.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd suggest that we discuss and implement support for supporting all three properties, so that we can try and let all relevant analyses for
memory safety
run together in order to be able to evaluate how we are actually performing in SV-COMP formemory safety
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This stuff was run on SV-COMP but that was done per-specification or? because there's no handling of all three simultaneously here still.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We added a workaround by having an internal "memory-safety" property which unites all three. This way we were able to let all three run and be tested simultaneously for the benchmarks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To clarify, this will be fixed in a follow-up PR, which will contain commits from the https://github.com/goblint/analyzer/tree/staging_memsafety branch, we just don't want to include them here yet to avoid polluting the history.