When I use the frama-c analysis my c program. It seems there exits a bug in the impact plug in of the frama-c. This is my program.
#include<stdio.h>
int global;
int main()
{
global = 12;
int result = 0;
if(global > 1)
{
result += 100;
}
else
{
result += 200;
}
return 0;
}
I want to find all the stataments impacted by the variable "global".
Obviously, the statement "result += 100;" in the scope of "if condition" which is related to the variable "global", so the statement "result += 100;" should be high light.
However, the running result seems not correct.
I'm assuming that you have used no special option, and that you have started the impact analysis in Frama-C's GUI, on the statement global = 12. If it is not the case, please provide more detailed instructions.
In your program, the if (global > 1) instruction gets selected because there is a data dependency to the statement global = 12. However, the statement result += 100 does not get selected by the Impact plugin. This is the intended behavior, because there is no control dependency in this case. Notice that the else branch of the if is dead. Thus, the execution of result += 100 does not really depend on the evaluation of if (global > 1), as the condition is always true. As the control flow always reaches result += 100 instruction, no control dependency exists.
If you want to exhibit a control dependency in this example, the simplest way consists in changing your line global = 12 into
global = Frama_C_interval(0,100);
and to add the file $(SHARE)/frama-C/libc/__fc_builtin.c to the command-line. The two instructions result += 100 and result += 200 will get selected, in each case because of a control dependency.
Related
So I am starting to mess around with Capacitive sensors and all because its some pretty cool stuff.
I have followed some tutorials online about how to set it up and use the CapSense library for Arduino and I just had a quick question about this code i wrote here to get the average for that data.
void loop() {
long AvrNum;
int counter = 0;
AvrNum += cs_4_2.capacitiveSensor(30);
counter++;
if (counter = 10) {
long AvrCap = AvrNum/10;
Serial.println(AvrCap);
counter = 0;
}
}
This is my loop statement and in the Serial it seems like its working but the numbers just look suspiciously low to me. I'm using a 10M resistor (brown, black, black, green, brown) and am touching a piece of foil that both the send and receive pins are attached to (electrical tape) and am getting numbers around about 650, give or take 30.
Basically I'm asking if this code looks right and if these numbers make sense...?
The language used in the Arduino environment is really just an unenforced subset of C++ with the main() function hidden inside the framework code supplied by the IDE. Your code is a module that will be compiled and linked to the framework. When the framework starts running it first initializes itself then your module by calling the function setup(). Once initialized, the framework enters an infinite loop, calling your modules function loop() on each iteration.
Your code is using local variables in loop() and expecting that they will hold their values from call to call. While this might happen in practice (and likely does since that part of framework's main() is probably just while(1) loop();), this is invoking the demons of Undefined Behavior. C++ does not make any promises about the value of an uninitialized variable, and even reading it can cause anything to happen. Even apparently working.
To fix this, the accumulator AvrNum and the counter must be stored somewhere other than on loop()'s stack. They could be declared static, or moved to the module outside. Outside is better IMHO, especially in the constrained Arduino environment.
You also need to clear the accumulator after you finish an average. This is the simplest form of an averaging filter, where you sum up fixed length blocks of N samples, and then use that average each Nth sample.
I believe this fragment (untested) will work for you:
long AvrNum;
int counter;
void setup() {
AvrNum = 0;
counter = 0;
}
void loop() {
AvrNum += cs_4_2.capacitiveSensor(30);
counter++;
if (counter == 10) {
long AvrCap = AvrNum/10;
Serial.println(AvrCap);
counter = 0;
AvrNum = 0;
}
}
I provided a setup(), although it is redundant with the C++ language's guarantee that the global variables begin life initialized to 0.
your line if (counter = 10) is invalid. It should be if (counter == 10)
The first sets counter to 10 and will (of course) evaluate to true.
The second tests for counter equal to 10 and will not evaluate to true until counter is, indeed, equal to 10.
Also, kaylum mentions the other problem, no initialization of AvrNum
This is What I ended up coming up with after spending some more time on it. After some manual calc it gets all the data.
long AvrArray [9];
for(int x = 0; x <= 10; x++){
if(x == 10){
long AvrMes = (AvrArray[0] + AvrArray[1] + AvrArray[2] + AvrArray[3] + AvrArray[4] + AvrArray[5] + AvrArray[6] + AvrArray[7] + AvrArray[8] + AvrArray[9]);
long AvrCap = AvrMes/x;
Serial.print("\t");
Serial.println(AvrCap);
x = 0;
}
AvrArray[x] = cs_4_2.capacitiveSensor(30);
Serial.println(AvrArray[x]);
delay(500);
I want to use user assertion of value analysis plugin of Frama-C (Neon version), however I have some problem to come up with the suitable model of assume statement, which is very useful for me to apply particular constraints, for example, here is my test code:
#include "/usr/local/share/frama-c/builtin.h"
int main(void)
{
int selection = Frama_C_interval(0,10);
int a;
assume(selection > 5);
if (selection > 5)
{
a = 2;
}
else
{
a = 1;
}
//# assert a == 2;
return 0;
}
I want that the value of selection will be greater than 5 after this assume statement so that the assertion will be valid.
My initial attempt was to write this function
void assume(int a){ while(!a); return;}
, but it was unsuccessful.
Please help me, thanks.
The easiest way to constrain selection would be to use an assert (which of course won't be proved by Value). If you want to distinguish between the assert that are in fact hypotheses you make from the assert that you want to verify, you can use ACSL's naming mechanism, such as
//# assert assumption: selection > 5;
and verify that the only assert that are unknown are the ones named assumption.
Using an assume function cannot work as such, because it will only reduce the possible value of the a parameter to be non-zero. Value is not able to infer the relation between the value of a in assume and the value of selection in main. However, it is possible to help it a little bit. First, -slevel allows to propagate several abstract state in parallel. Second, an assert given in an disjunctive will force Value to split its state (if the -slevel is big enough to do so). Thus, with the following code
#include "builtin.h"
void assume(int a) { while(!a); return; }
int main(void)
{
int selection = Frama_C_interval(0,10);
int a;
/*# assert selection > 5 || selection <= 5; */
assume(selection > 5);
if (selection > 5)
{
a = 2;
}
else
{
a = 1;
}
//# assert a == 2;
return 0;
}
and the following command line:
frama-c -cpp-extra-args="-I$(frama-c -print-share-path)" -val -slevel 2
After the first assert (which obviously valid), Frama-C will propagate separately two states: one in which selection > 5 and one in which selection <= 5. In the first case, assume is called with 1 as argument, thus returns immediately, and the then branch of the if is taken, so that the second assert is valid. In the second state, assume is called with 0, and never returns. Thus for all cases where control reaches the second assert, it is valid.
Note that you really need to add the first assert inside the body of main, and to copy in ACSL the argument you pass to assume. Otherwise, the state split won't occur (more precisely, you will split on a, not on selection).
I was wondering if you could help me use NEON intrinsics to optimize this mask function. I already tried to use auto-vectorization using the O3 gcc compiler flag but the performance of the function was smaller than running it with O2, which turns off the auto-vectorization. For some reason the assembly code produced with O3 is 1,5 longer than the one with O2.
void mask(unsigned int x, unsigned int y, uint32_t *s, uint32_t *m)
{
unsigned int ixy;
ixy = xsize * ysize;
while (ixy--)
*(s++) &= *(m++);
}
Probably I have to use the following commands:
vld1q_u32 // to load 4 integers from s and m
vandq_u32 // to execute logical and between the 4 integers from s and m
vst1q_u32 // to store them back into s
However i don't know how to do it in the most optimal way. For instance should I increase s,m by 4 after loading , anding and storing? I am quite new to NEON so I would really need some help.
I am using gcc 4.8.1 and I am compiling with the following cmd:
arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -mthumb -march=armv7-a -mtune=cortex-a9 -mcpu=cortex-a9 -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon -O3 -fprefetch-loop-arrays name.c -o name
Thanks in advance
I would probably do it like this. I've included 4x loop unrolling. Preloading the cache is always a good idea and can speed things up another 25%. Since there's not much processing going on (it's mostly spending time loading and storing), it's best to load lots of registers, then process them as it gives time for the data to actually load. It assumes the data is an even multiple of 16 elements.
void fmask(unsigned int x, unsigned int y, uint32_t *s, uint32_t *m)
{
unsigned int ixy;
uint32x4_t srcA,srcB,srcC,srcD;
uint32x4_t maskA,maskB,maskC,maskD;
ixy = xsize * ysize;
ixy /= 16; // process 16 at a time
while (ixy--)
{
__builtin_prefetch(&s[64]); // preload the cache
__builtin_prefetch(&m[64]);
srcA = vld1q_u32(&s[0]);
maskA = vld1q_u32(&m[0]);
srcB = vld1q_u32(&s[4]);
maskB = vld1q_u32(&m[4]);
srcC = vld1q_u32(&s[8]);
maskC = vld1q_u32(&m[8]);
srcD = vld1q_u32(&s[12]);
maskD = vld1q_u32(&m[12]);
srcA = vandq_u32(srcA, maskA);
srcB = vandq_u32(srcB, maskB);
srcC = vandq_u32(srcC, maskC);
srcD = vandq_u32(srcD, maskD);
vst1q_u32(&s[0], srcA);
vst1q_u32(&s[4], srcB);
vst1q_u32(&s[8], srcC);
vst1q_u32(&s[12], srcD);
s += 16;
m += 16;
}
}
I would start with the simplest one and take it as a reference for compare with future routines.
A good rule of thumb is to calculate needed things as soon as possible, not exactly when needed.
This means that instructions can take X cycles to execute, but the results are not always immediately ready, so scheduling is important
As an example, a simple scheduling schema for your case would be (pseudocode)
nn=n/4 // Assuming n is a multiple of 4
LOADI_S(0) // Load and immediately after increment pointer
LOADI_M(0) // Load and immediately after increment pointer
for( k=1; k<nn;k++){
AND_SM(k-1) // Inner op
LOADI_S(k) // Load and increment after
LOADI_M(k) // Load and increment after
STORE_S(k-1) // Store and increment after
}
AND_SM(nn-1)
STORE_S(nn-1) // Store. Not needed to increment
Leaving out these instructions from the inner loop we achieve that the ops inside don't depend on the result of the previous op.
This schema can be further extended in order to take profit of the time that otherwise would be lost waiting for the result of the previous op.
Also, as intrinsics still depend on the optimizer, see what does the compiler do under different optimization options. I prefer to use inline assembly, which is not difficult for small routines, and give you more control.
I have a solution which includes three projects. one is creating static library i.e .lib file. It contains one header file main.h and one main.cpp file. cpp file contains the definition of functions of header file.
second project is .exe project which includes the header file main.h and calls a function of header file.
third project is also a .exe project which includes the header file and uses a variable flag of header file.
Now both .exe projects are creating different instance of the variable. But I want to share same instance of the variable between the projects dynamically. as I have to map the value generated by one project into other project at the same instant.
Please help me as I am nearing my project deadline.
Thanks for the help.
Here are some part of the code.
main.cpp and main.h are files of .lib project
main.h
extern int flag;
extern int detect1(void);
main.cpp
#include<stdio.h>
#include"main.h"
#include <Windows.h>
#include <ShellAPI.h>
using namespace std;
using namespace cv;
int flag=0;
int detect1(void)
{
int Cx=0,Cy=0,Kx=20,Ky=20,Sx=0,Sy=0,j=0;
//create the cascade classifier object used for the face detection
CascadeClassifier face_cascade;
//use the haarcascade_frontalface_alt.xml library
face_cascade.load("E:\\haarcascade_frontalface_alt.xml");
//System::DateTime now = System::DateTime::Now;
//cout << now.Hour;
//WinExec("E:\\FallingBlock\\FallingBlock\\FallingBlock\\bin\\x86\\Debug\\FallingBlock.exe",SW_SHOW);
//setup video capture device and link it to the first capture device
VideoCapture captureDevice;
captureDevice.open(0);
//setup image files used in the capture process
Mat captureFrame;
Mat grayscaleFrame;
//create a window to present the results
namedWindow("capture", 1);
//create a loop to capture and find faces
while(true)
{
//capture a new image frame
captureDevice>>captureFrame;
//convert captured image to gray scale and equalize
cvtColor(captureFrame, grayscaleFrame, CV_BGR2GRAY);
equalizeHist(grayscaleFrame, grayscaleFrame);
//create a vector array to store the face found
std::vector<Rect> faces;
//find faces and store them in the vector array
face_cascade.detectMultiScale(grayscaleFrame, faces, 1.1, 3, CV_HAAR_FIND_BIGGEST_OBJECT|CV_HAAR_SCALE_IMAGE, Size(30,30));
//draw a rectangle for all found faces in the vector array on the original image
for(unsigned int i = 0; i < faces.size(); i++)
{
Point pt1(faces[i].x + faces[i].width, faces[i].y + faces[i].height);
Point pt2(faces[i].x, faces[i].y);
rectangle(captureFrame, pt1, pt2, cvScalar(0, 255, 0, 0), 1, 8, 0);
if(faces.size()>=1)
j++;
Cx = faces[i].x + (faces[i].width / 2);
Cy = faces[i].y + (faces[i].height / 2);
if(j==1)
{
Sx=Cx;
Sy=Cy;
flag=0;
}
}
if(Cx-Sx > Kx)
{
flag = 1;
printf("%d",flag);
}
else
{
if(Cx-Sx < -Kx)
{
flag = 2;
printf("%d",flag);
//update(2);
}
else
{
if(Cy-Sy > Ky)
{
flag = 3;
printf("%d",flag);
//update(3);
}
else
{
if(Cy-Sy < -Ky)
{
flag = 4;
printf("%d",flag);
//update(4);
}
else
if(abs(Cx-Sx) < Kx && abs(Cy-Sy)<Ky)
{
flag = 0;
printf("%d",flag);
//update(0);
}
}
}
}
2nd project's code
face.cpp
#include"main.h"
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
detect1();
}
3rd project's code
tetris.cpp
#include"main.h"
int key;
key = flag;
if(key==0)
{
MessageBox(hwnd,"Space2","TetRiX",0);
}
if(key==4)
{
tetris.handleInput(1);
tetris.drawScreen(2);
//MessageBox(hwnd,"Space2","TetRiX",0);
}
You need to look up how to do inter-process communication in the operating system under which your applications will run. (At this point I assume that the processes are running on the same computer.) It looks like you're using Windows (based on seeing a call to "MessageBox") so the simplest means would be for both processes to use RegisterWindowMessage create a commonly-understood message value, and then send the data via LPARAM using either PostMessage or SendMessage. (You'll need each of them to get the window handle of the other, which is reasonably easy.) You'll want to have some sort of exclusion mechanism (mutex or critical section) in both processes to ensure that the shared value can't be read and written at the same time. If both processes can do the "change and exchange" then you'll have an interesting problem to solve if both try to do that at the same time, because you'll have to deal with the possibility of deadlocks over that shared value.
You can also use shared memory, but that's a bit more involved.
If the processes are on different computers you'll need to do it via TCP/IP or a protocol on top of TCP/IP. You could use a pub-sub arrangement--or any number of things. Without an understanding of exactly what you're trying to accomplish, it's difficult to know what to recommend.
(For the record, there is almost no way in a multi-process/multi-threaded O/S to share something "at the same instant." You can get arbitrarily close, but computers don't work like that.)
Given the level of difficulty involved, is there some other design that might make this cleaner? Why do these processes have to exchange information this way? Must it be done using separate processes?
I'm using a project which uses the Eigen library. I've had to already fixed an issue where when using the data types provided by eigen within a STL, I get an align error
error C2719: '_Val': formal parameter with __declspec(align('16'))
won't be aligned
see
http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/dox/TopicStlContainers.html or -http://www.mrpt.org/Matrices_vectors_arrays_and_Linear_Algebra_MRPT_and_Eigen_classes)
Once this was fixed i could compile and run.
But now at run time I'm getting another error
Debug Error!
R6010
abort() has been called.
So the code in question references my structure and a vector of my structure (with the eigen specially aligned fix):
typedef struct {
Vector4f v4;
Matrix4f M4;
bool b;
} my_struct;
typedef std::vector<my_struct, Eigen::aligned_allocator<my_struct>> my_struct;
Then my code fails after a when I try to create a new my_struct after a certain number of iterations (it can sometimes creates the new object, with no problems), other times it fails.
for (int i = 0; i<len; i++) {
Vector4f vec;
Matrix4f mat;
my_struct* temp = new my_struct();
}
Any ideas?
Tom
Without -DNDEBUG, you should have got an assert sending you to this page. In your case, you should follow this one. In short, add EIGEN_MAKE_ALIGNED_OPERATOR_NEW to your structure such that new my_struct call an aligned memory allocator.