This specification relates in general to software compilers, and, in particular, to methods and apparatus for determining if a user-defined software function is a memory allocation function during compile-time.
Software programs typically include numerous “memory allocation” functions. A memory allocation function, such as the C “malloc” function, sets aside a portion of the computer's memory resources (i.e., a “memory object”) for use by the associated software program.
Software compilers often attempt to disambiguate references to memory objects during compile time in order to produce more efficient object code. For pointers to static memory objects, the compile-time names of the memory objects may be used to abstract the target memory. However, dynamically allocated memory objects do not have compile-time names. Instead, the compiler may use the static allocation site of the memory object as a compile-tie name.
However, using this scheme, the compiler cannot disambiguate between objects associated with the same allocation site if a call is made to a standard memory allocation function within a user defined function (i.e., the compiler cannot tell the difference between two different memory objects produced by two different calls to the same user-defined function which allocates memory). As a result, memory objects produced by memory allocation functions which are included in a user-defined function are not distinguished during compile-time when more than one call to the user-defined function is made by the software. In other words, the compiler does not recognize the user-defined function as a memory allocation function, because the compiler does not know if the user-defined function returns a new memory object every time the user-defined function is invoked, and the compiler does not know if variables being assigned are available outside the scope of the user defined function (i.e., the address of the allocated memory object may or may not be stored in a variable or a data structure that is accessible by a function that is not within the user-defined function.)
A block diagram of an example computer system 100 is illustrated in
The CPU(s) 104 may include any type of well known microprocessor, such as a microprocessor from the Intel Pentium™ family of microprocessors, the Intel Itanium™ family of microprocessors, and/or the Intel XScale™ family of processors. The main memory device 108 may include dynamic random access memory (DRAM), but may also include non-volatile memory. In an example, the memory device(s) 108 store a software program which is executed by one or more of the CPU(s) 104 in a well known manner.
The interface circuit(s) 110 may be implemented using any type of well known interface standard, such as an Ethernet interface and/or a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface. In the illustrated example, one or more input devices 112 are connected to the interface circuits 110 for entering data and commands into the main processing unit 102. For example, an input device 112 may be a keyboard, mouse, touch screen, track pad, track ball, isopoint, and/or a voice recognition system.
In the illustrated example, one or more displays, printers, speakers, and/or other output devices 114 are also connected to the main processing unit 102 via one or more of the interface circuits 110. The display 114 may be a cathode ray tube (CRT), a liquid crystal display (LCD), or any other type of display. The display 114 may generate visual indications of data generated during operation of the main processing unit 102. For example, the visual indications may include prompts for human operator input, calculated values, detected data, etc.
The illustrated computer system 100 also includes one or more storage devices 116. For example, the computer system 100 may include one or more hard drives, a compact disk (CD) drive, a digital versatile disk drive (DVD), and/or other computer media input/output (I/O) devices.
The illustrated computer system 100 also exchanges data with other devices via a connection to a network 118. The network connection may be any type of network connection, such as an Ethernet connection, digital subscriber line (DSL), telephone line, coaxial cable, etc. The network 118 may be any type of network, such as the Internet, a telephone network, a cable network, and/or a wireless network.
Another example implementation of the main processing unit 102 is illustrated in
For the purpose of constructing a plurality of use-def chains for a user-defined software function, the main processing unit 102 includes a use-def chain constructor 204. Use-def chains are a standard data structure generated by many optimizing compilers in a well known manner. See, for example, Aho, Sethi, Ullman, Compilers. Principles, techniques, and Tools, Addison-Wesley, (1986). In one example, a Static Single Assignment (SSA) use-def chain is constructed.
For the purpose of tracing a path of one or more return statements within the user-defined function, the main processing unit 102 includes a path tracer 206. The path tracer 206 traces code paths by traversing the use-def chains in a well known manner. For example, a “return” statement may be traced back to a calling function. Of course, functions may be called multiple times from multiple locations in the software program, and functions may be nested within other functions. However, a person of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate that the ‘return’ paths of such functions may be traced using use-def chains in a well known manner.
For the purpose of storing data indicating that the user-defined software function is a memory allocation function or a non-memory allocation function, the main processing unit 102 includes a memory device 208. As stated above, the memory device 208 may be implemented by any type of memory device including, but not limited to, dynamic random access memory (DRAM), static random access memory (SRAM), and/or non-volatile memory.
For the purpose of controlling the interaction of the use-def chain constructor 204, the path tracer 206, and the memory device 208, the main processing unit 102 includes a controller 202. The controller 202 is operatively coupled to the use-def chain constructor 204, the path tracer 206, and the memory device 208 in a well known manner. For example, one set of software instructions may be operatively coupled to another set of software instructions via a subroutine call, parameter passing, and/or shared memory location(s). In another example, one piece of electronic circuitry may be operatively coupled to another piece of electronic circuitry via electrical signal line(s) such as a bus. In yet another example, a set of software instructions may be operatively coupled to a piece of electronic circuitry via electrical signal line(s) stimulated by a microprocessor executing the software instructions. In one example, the controller 202, the use-def chain constructor 204, and the path tracer 206 are implemented by the CPU 104 executing software instructions.
In an example, the controller 202 is structured to cause the use-def chain constructor 204 to construct a plurality of use-def chains for the user-defined software function. For example, the use-def chain constructor 204 may construct an SSA representation. In addition, the controller 202 preferably causes the path tracer 206 to trace a path of a return statement within the user-defined function using at least one of the use-def chains. Subsequently, the controller 202 may denote the user-defined software function as a non-memory allocation function if a path of the return statement does not terminate at a call to a known memory allocation function on the right hand side of an assignment operator. Preferably, the controller 202 is structured to recognize at least one of a “malloc” function, a “calloc” function, a “new” function, a standard C library function, a standard C++ library function, and/or any programming language function which allocates memory as known memory allocation functions.
Further, the controller 202 preferably causes the path tracer 206 to trace at least one use-def chain of a variable on the left hand side of the assignment operator if the path of the at least one return statement does terminate at the call to one of the known memory allocation functions on the right hand side of the assignment operator. Subsequently, the controller 202 may denote the user-defined software function as a non-memory allocation function if the variable on the left hand side of the assignment operator is available outside the scope of the user-defined function. If the controller 202 does not denote the user-defined software function as a non-memory allocation function according to either of the above criteria, the controller 202 preferably denotes the user-defined software function as a memory allocation.
A flowchart of a process 300 for determining if a user-defined software function is a memory allocation function during compile-time is illustrated in
Generally, the process 300 causes the CPU 104 to determine if a user-defined software function returns a new memory object every time the user-defined function is invoked, and determine if the memory objects created by the user-defined function are available outside the scope of the user defined function. If the user-defined function returns a new memory object every time the user-defined function is invoked, and the memory objects created by the user-defined function are not available outside the scope of the user defined function, then the user-defined function is determined to be a memory allocation function. Otherwise, the user-defined function is determined to be a non-memory allocation function.
In the example illustrated in
If none of the return paths terminates on the right hand side of an assignment operator with a call to one of the known memory allocation functions (block 310), the computer system 100 preferably records in memory 108 and/or device 116 that the user-defined function is not a memory allocation function (block 312). If the path of all return statements terminate at a call to one of the known memory allocation functions or a “null” on the right hand side of an assignment operator (block 310), the computer system 100 preferably traces the def-use chain of the variable on the left hand side of the assignment operator for each such return statement (block 314).
If any such variable on the left hand side of the assignment operator is available outside the scope of the user-defined function (block 316), the computer system 100 preferably records in memory 108 and/or device 116 that the user-defined function is not a memory allocation function (block 312). If no such variable on the left hand side of the assignment operator is available outside the scope of the user-defined function (block 316), the computer system 100 preferably records in memory 108 and/or device 116 that the user-defined function is a memory allocation function (block 318).
Once the computer system 100 determines if the user-defined function is a memory allocation function or a non-memory allocation function, the computer system 100 may communicate the results to a programmer on a user output device 114 and/or pass the results on to an additional compiler sub-system.
In summary, persons of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate that methods and apparatus for determining if a user-defined software function is a memory allocation function during compile-time have been provided. Systems implementing the teachings described herein may benefit from more efficient object code.
The foregoing description has been presented for the purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the this patent to the examples disclosed. Many modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings. It is intended that the scope of the this patent be limited not by this detailed description of examples, but rather by the claims appended hereto as properly construed under the law.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5142681 | Driscoll et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5287511 | Robinson et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5327562 | Adcock | Jul 1994 | A |
5437037 | Furuichi | Jul 1995 | A |
5448737 | Burke et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5524244 | Robinson et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5535391 | Hejlsberg et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5583988 | Crank et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5603030 | Gray et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5617569 | Gray et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5657447 | Leung et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5671431 | Knopp | Sep 1997 | A |
5809554 | Benayon et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5828883 | Hall | Oct 1998 | A |
5864862 | Kriens et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
6058460 | Nakhimovsky | May 2000 | A |
6141712 | Sudhakaran et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6154823 | Benayon et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154877 | Ramkumar et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6212673 | House et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6246405 | Johnson | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6253368 | Nelin et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6301704 | Chow et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6366994 | Kalyur | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6427234 | Chambers et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6571387 | Chow et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6625804 | Ringseth et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6647547 | Kanamaru et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6721943 | Krishnaiyer et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6751792 | Nair | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6829190 | Snyder et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6971083 | Farrugia et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7181734 | Swamy et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
20020056075 | Hamilton et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020087949 | Golender et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020129339 | Callahan et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020144244 | Krishnaiyer et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020178437 | Blais et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030023956 | Dulberg et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030056199 | Li et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030056200 | Li et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20040162930 | Forin et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20060179427 | Underseth et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040078789 A1 | Apr 2004 | US |