Dear Daniel and Cristian,
One more thing is, if I do not declare any local var at foo() and just
return (as below), the memory usage is only about 1%.
void foo() {
return;
}
2010/3/31 Heming Cui <heming at cs.columbia.edu>
> Dear Daniel and Cristian,
> I am Heming Cui, Prof. Junfeng Yang's student. May I ask you a
> question, please? Recently I was running klee with some long running
> programs and found a question about the memory usage of local variable of
> functions in klee.
> Please refer to the source code below (and also in the attachment).
> Foo() dedclares a function local var, and the main function calls fool()
> again and again. If I compile this code with llvm-gcc and run the bit
> code with klee, the memory usage increases to more than 90% as soon as the
> program starts and never drops. The memory in my machine is 2GB. If I
> compile this code with gcc and run it natively, and the memory usage is only
> 0.1% and never increases.
> If I change "int a[100000];" to be "int a;", the memory usage would
> increase to more than 90% after about 10 seconds of start, and never drops.
> It seems to me that we might need to unbind local vars in klee memory
> address space after a function exits? I am a little confused of this part,
> since if my program runs for a long time, this problem would happen and
> affect the speed.
>
> Memory usage of klee is 93.3%:
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+
> COMMAND
> 3099 heming 20 0 1773m 469m 4 D 1.7 93.3 0:04.18 klee
>
>
> Source code (also attached):
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> void foo() {
> int a[100000];
> return;
> }
>
> int main(int argc, char * argv[]) {
> while (1) {
> foo();
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> --
> Regards,
> Heming Cui
>
--
Regards,
Heming Cui
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://keeda.Stanford.EDU/pipermail/klee-dev/attachments/20100331/656d70a5/attachment.html
