Open lucasccordeiro opened 6 years ago
@tautschnig: I think I have seen one of your PRs related to bswap
.
Yes, but 1) should that be the root cause then there's a problem with the benchmark as it would rely on GCC built-ins; 2) I believe we would generate non-deterministic values in such a case, and thus over-approximate rather than introduce an error. Also, the solver terminates VERY quickly, so I'd be a bit surprised if it were related to bswap
.
Thanks for the feedback.
I'm taking a look at this issue right now.
On 4 December 2017 at 11:44, Michael Tautschnig notifications@github.com wrote:
Yes, but 1) should that be the root cause then there's a problem with the benchmark as it would rely on GCC built-ins; 2) I believe we would generate non-deterministic values in such a case, and thus over-approximate rather than introduce an error. Also, the solver terminates VERY quickly, so I'd be a bit surprised if it were related to bswap.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/marek-trtik/cbmc/issues/38#issuecomment-348939061, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADheHW11FV4XVmnF1GIByvONdRTVy0-pks5s89ssgaJpZM4Q0hRc .
Here are results of my investigation:
./cbmc --graphml-witness witness.graphml --64 --propertyfile ../../sv-benchmarks/c/Systems_DeviceDriversLinux64_ReachSafety.prp ../../sv-benchmarks/c/ldv-linux-4.0-rc1-mav/linux-4.0-rc1---net--netfilter--nfnetlink_log.ko_false-unreach-call.cil.c