Aurora Labs Limited

Emc IP Holding Company LLC

Harmonic, Inc.

Carmit Sahar

Zohar Fox

Eyal Kolman

Alon Kaufman

Shay Amram

Marcelo Blatt

Kineret Raviv

Alex Zaslavsky

Anatoly Gendelev

Idan Achituve

Roni Frumkes

Disclosed herein are techniques for automatically reconfiguring code based on function and subfunction analysis. Techniques include determining, by parsing a code structure representing a plurality of functions, that at least one first function has a threshold degree of complexity; identifying, in response to the determination, a plurality of subfunctions based on the at least one first function, the plurality of subfunctions having a commonality with the at least one first function; and forming a second function by reconfiguring the first function to call at least one of the identified plurality of subfunctions.

Automatic code reconfiguration based on function and subfunction analysis

Disclosed herein are techniques for reducing sizes of executable files. Techniques include identifying an executable file having a plurality of functions; determining, by parsing the executable file or a code structure representing the executable file, that a first and second function each comprise a common block; identifying a third function configured to perform the common block; changing the first and second functions by: removing the common block from at least one of the first or second functions; and inserting a call to the third function into at least one of the first or second functions; and updating the executable file by: replacing, in the executable file, at least one of the first or second functions with at least one of the updated first or second functions; and adding the third function to the executable file.

Shrinking files based on function analysis

Disclosed herein are techniques for matching symbols between code sets. Techniques include accessing a first symbol associated with a first version of software; accessing a second symbol associated with a second version of the software; comparing the first symbol to the second symbol; determining, based on the comparing, whether the second symbol is a functional equivalent of the first symbol; and performing a designation action based on whether the second symbol is a functional equivalent of the first symbol.

Symbol-matching between software versions

Disclosed herein are techniques for analyzing control-flow integrity based on functional line-of-code behavior and relation models. Techniques include receiving data based on runtime operations of a controller; constructing a line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions on the controller based on the received data; constructing, based on the line-of-code behavioral and relation model, a dynamic control flow integrity model configured for the controller to enforce in real-time; and deploying the dynamic control flow integrity model to the controller.

Verifying integrity of controller software updates

Disclosed herein are techniques for visualizing and configuring controller function sequences. Techniques include identifying at least one executable code segment associated with a controller; analyzing the at least one executable code segment to determine at least one function and at least one functional relationship associated with the at least one code segment; constructing, a software functionality line-of-code behavior and relation model visually depicting the determined at least one function and at least one functional relationship; displaying the software functionality line-of-code behavior and relation model at a user interface; receiving a first input at the interface; in response to the received first input, animating the line-of-code behavior and relation model to visually depict execution of the at least one executable code segment on the controller; receiving a second input at the interface; and in response to the received second input, animating an update to the line-of-code behavior and relation model.

Visualization of code execution through line-of-code behavior and relation models

Disclosed herein are techniques for identifying software dependencies based on functional line-of-code behavior and relation models. Techniques include accessing a first line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions of a first portion of executable code, the first portion of executable code being associated with a first symbol; detecting a change to the first portion of executable code; constructing, based on the changed first portion of executable code, a second line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions of the changed first portion of executable code; determining, based on the constructed second model, a dependency between (i) the changed first portion of executable code or the first symbol and (ii) a second symbol; and generating, based on the determined difference, a report identifying the dependency.

Identifying software dependencies using controller code models

Disclosed herein are techniques for analyzing software delta changes based on functional line-of-code behavior and relation models. Techniques include identifying a prompt to change a first version of code on a controller to a second version of code; constructing, based on the identified prompt, a line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions of the controller based on the second version of code; performing a signature operation on the generated line-of-code behavior and relation model to produce a signature value; and sending the signature value to the controller; wherein the controller is configured to compare the signature value to a computed signature value that the controller is configured to compute based on the second version of code and determine, based on the comparison, whether to validate the second version of code.

Disclosed herein are techniques for using a line-of-code behavior and relation model to determine software functionality changes. Techniques include identifying a first portion of executable code and a second portion of executable code; accessing a first line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions of the first portion of executable code; constructing, based on the second portion of executable code, a second line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions of the second portion of executable code; performing a functional differential comparison of the first line-of-code behavior and relation model to the second line-of-code behavior and relation model; determining, based on the functional differential comparison, a status of functional equivalence between the first portion of executable code and the code portion of executable code; and generating, based on the determined difference, a report identifying the status of functional equivalence.

Proving whether software functionality has changed following a software change

Disclosed herein are techniques for identifying software interdependencies based on functional line-of-code behavior and relation models. Techniques include identifying a first portion of executable code associated with a first controller; accessing a functional line-of-code behavior and relation model representing functionality of the first portion of executable code and a second portion of executable code; determining, based on the functional line-of-code behavior and relation model, that the second portion of executable code is interdependent with the first portion of executable code; and generating, based on the determined interdependency, a report identifying the interdependent first portion of executable code and second portion of executable code.

Identifying software interdependencies using line-of-code behavior and relation models

Disclosed herein are techniques for reducing a size of a delta file. Techniques include receiving change code representing a change to device code installed on a device; receiving the device code; identifying, by parsing the change code or a code structure representing the change code, a first function represented by the change code; identifying, by parsing the device code or a code structure representing the device code, a second function represented by the device code; identifying a plurality of subfunctions based on the first and second functions; determining sub-changes to at least some of the plurality of subfunctions, the sub changes being associated with a change to the second function; and generating the delta file comprising object change elements, the object change elements being configured to effect the sub-changes to the device code.

Shrinking delta files based on function analysis

Shrinking executable files based on function analysis

Disclosed herein are techniques for analyzing hardware change impacts based on at least one functional line-of-code behavior and relation model. Techniques include identifying a new hardware component associated with a system; accessing a first line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions using the new hardware component; accessing a second line-of-code behavior and relation model representing execution of functions on a previous hardware component of the system; performing a functional differential comparison of the first line-of-code behavior and relation model to the second line-of-code behavior and relation model; determining, based on the functional differential comparison, a status of functional equivalence between the new hardware component and the previous hardware component; and generating, based on the determined difference, a report identifying the status of functional equivalence.

Growing community of inventors

Tel Aviv, Israel

Carmit Sahar