PointEval: On the Impact of Pointer Analysis Frameworks
Jyoti Prakash, Abhishek Tiwari, Christian Hammer

TL;DR
This paper evaluates and compares two major pointer analysis frameworks, WALA and Doop, on benchmarks, revealing that Doop generally offers better precision and scalability, with Soot's IR often outperforming Wala's IR.
Contribution
The study provides a comprehensive comparison of WALA and Doop frameworks, including their IRs, and introduces PointerBench for validating pointer analysis results.
Findings
Doop outperforms WALA in precision and scalability.
Soot's IR generally yields more precise and scalable analysis than Wala's IR.
PointerBench effectively validates points-to statistics.
Abstract
Pointer analysis is a foundational analysis leveraged by various static analyses. Therefore, it gathered wide attention in research for decades. Some pointer analysis frameworks are based on succinct declarative specifications. However, these tools are heterogeneous in terms of the underlying intermediate representation (IR), heap abstraction, and programming methodology. This situation complicates a fair comparison of these frameworks and thus hinders further research. Consequently, the literature lacks an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of these tools. In this work, we evaluate two major frameworks for pointer analysis, WALA and Doop, on the DaCapo set of benchmarks. We compare the pointer analyses available in Wala and Doop, and conclude that---even though based on a declarative specification---Doop provides a better pointer analysis than Wala in terms of precision and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques · Software Engineering Research · Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
