News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

ltfish

Re:Performance of the Python 3.14 tail-call interpreter on Tuesday March 11, 2025 @12:57AM (#43329269)
As far as I am aware, the official CPython binaries on Linux have always been built using GCC, so you will have to build your own CPython using both Clang 18 and 19 to notice the speed difference. I think this is partly why no one has noticed the speed difference yet.
DARPA’s Enhanced SBOM for Optimized Software Sustainment (E-BOSS) program may achieve this goal (via a slightly different approach).
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @11:30AM (#26890956)
There is no doubt that Kangjie is involved in Aditya's research work, which leads to bogus patches sent to Linux devs. However, based on my understanding of how CS research groups usually function, I do not think Kangjie knew the exact patches that Aditya sent out. In this specific case, I feel Aditya is more likely the one to blame: He should have examined these automatically generated patches more carefully before sending them in for reviewing.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @11:03AM (#26890583)
Some clarifications since they are unclear in the original report.

- Aditya Pakki (the author who sent the new round of seemingly bogus patches) is not involved in the S&P 2021 research. This means Aditya is likely to have nothing to do with the prior round of patching attempts that led to the S&P 2021 paper.

- According to the authors' clarification [1], the S&P 2021 paper did not introduce any bugs into Linux kernel. The three attempts did not even become Git commits.

Greg has all reasons to be unhappy since they were unknowingly experimented on and used as lab rats. However, the round of patches that triggered his anger *are very likely* to have nothing to do with the three intentionally incorrect patch attempts leading to the paper. Many people on HN do not seem to know this.

[1] https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kjlu/papers/clarifications-hc....

Re:Angr – User-friendly binary analysis platform on Tuesday May 22, 2018 @02:02PM (#17128035)
You are more or less correct. The `project.execute()` API was indeed inspired by Manticore!