Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #30761

Re: Stack analysis tool that really work?

From Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Stack analysis tool that really work?
Date 2021-08-05 13:43 +0300
Organization Tidorum Ltd
Message-ID <in1tnaFbu8rU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <seb3fa$82q$1@dont-email.me> <imvvdmFu7i4U1@mid.individual.net> <seek0l$e3r$1@dont-email.me> <in05quF11e0U1@mid.individual.net> <sef5c3$5so$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On 2021-08-05 1:46, Don Y wrote:
> On 8/4/2021 11:50 AM, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>> On 2021-08-04 20:50, Don Y wrote:
>>> On 8/4/2021 10:00 AM, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>>
>>     ...
>>
>>>> I am the main author of a WCET-analysis tool, Bound-T, that also 
>>>> does stack analysis and is now free. However, there is (as yet) no 
>>>> port for ARM Cortex-M. See http://www.bound-t.com/.
>>>
>>> But not free as in open (?)
>>
>> The source code is downloadable; see http://bound-t.com/download/src. 
>> The copyright text is of my own writing, but I'm open to switching to 
>> some better-known copyright such as GPL or even some non-viral version.
> 
> Ah, OK.  I may have a look at it to see how well it works and
> how much work to port to ARM objects.  Given that you've not
> done so, already (despite your familiarity with the codebase),
> I suspect that's not a trivial task?


There is an ARM TDMI port (32-bit ARM code and THUMB, pre Cortex), but 
of course that architecture is out of date. I started a port to ARM 
Cortex-M, but did not (yet) finish it for the reasons described on the 
status page.

Note that the tool is implemented in Ada.

Porting to a new target processor means writing procedures to decode the 
machine instructions and translate them to the internal representation 
used by the analysis. Sometimes it is also necessary to modify or extend 
the tool parts that read the executable files and especially the 
debugging information -- some of that may be compiler-specific, 
unfortunately. It is a fair amount of work and requires a good 
understanding both of the target processor and of the Bound-T internal 
representation. And Ada, of course, but every programmer should know 
Ada, IMO :-)

>> However, you may want to read about the state of the tool at 
>> http://bound-t.com/status.html.
> 
> Hmmm... that sounds ominous!  :>  (or, am I just too much of a Cynic?)


The problems described on the status page are more relevant to WCET 
analysis than to stack analysis, but can affect stack analysis too, in 
some cases.

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 18:22 +0200
  Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-07-29 19:36 +0300
  Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-02 17:56 -0700
    Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-03 11:43 +0300
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-03 02:28 -0700
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 22:14 +0300
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 15:43 -0700
    Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 11:49 +0200
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-03 20:17 -0700
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 16:43 +0200
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 11:06 -0700
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 12:00 +0300
              Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 04:54 -0700
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 20:00 +0300
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 10:50 -0700
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 21:50 +0300
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 15:46 -0700
              Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 13:43 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 06:16 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 18:39 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 01:09 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-06 22:58 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 16:04 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 16:06 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 14:20 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 10:26 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 20:46 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 15:14 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 14:09 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 08:09 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 19:50 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 20:02 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 10:34 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 21:10 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2021-08-06 22:55 -0400
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 13:40 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2021-08-08 18:34 -0400
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-09 10:50 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2021-08-09 11:26 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-09 22:59 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-09 12:04 -0700
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 13:18 +0300
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 04:59 -0700

csiph-web