thr3ads.net - llvm dev - [LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses" [Aug 2012]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Rinaldini Julien

2012-Aug-20 13:24 UTC

[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

Hi!

I'm having some trouble with a pass I'm writing.

I'm using DemotePHIToStack to remove all phi node in my code with this code
(this is the first thing I do in my pass):

    // Erase phi node
    vector<PHINode*> phis;
    for (Function::iterator i=f->begin();i!=f->end();++i) {
        for(BasicBlock::iterator b=i->begin();b!=i->end();++b) {
            if(isa<PHINode>(b)) {
                PHINode *phi= cast<PHINode>(b);
                phis.push_back(phi);
            }   
        }   
    }   

    for(vector<PHINode*>::iterator i=phis.begin();i!=phis.end();++i) {
        PHINode *phi = *i; 
        DemotePHIToStack(phi,NULL);
    }

If I only run this code, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.ll).
If I run the rest of my pass, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.obfu.ll)

And I got this error for the file safer.phi.obfu.ll:

Instruction does not dominate all uses!
  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0, i8*
%arraydecay), !dbg !322
Instruction does not dominate all uses!
  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0, i8*
%arraydecay), !dbg !322
Broken module found, compilation aborted!
0  opt             0x0000000000946d3f
1  opt             0x0000000000947229
2  libpthread.so.0 0x00007fcba9ff2170
3  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925dfa5 gsignal + 53
4  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925f428 abort + 328 
5  opt             0x000000000090951d
6  opt             0x00000000008e609f
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) + 607
7  opt             0x00000000008e60f3
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 51
8  opt             0x00000000008e5c6c
llvm::MPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 524
9  opt             0x00000000008e5d77
llvm::PassManagerImpl::run(llvm::Module&) + 151
10 opt             0x00000000004a1d99 main + 3385
11 libc.so.6       0x00007fcba924a725 __libc_start_main + 245 
12 opt             0x00000000004a6135
Stack dump:
0.  Program arguments: opt -load
../../../build/Release+Asserts/lib/LLVMobfuscation.so -flattening
src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -o src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -stats
1.  Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module
'src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc'.
2.  Running pass 'Module Verifier' on function
'@safer_k64_setup'
make: *** [src/ciphers/safer/safer.o] Aborted


So the problem come from the bloc if.end11 and cond.end. I understand the
dominate problem, but the thing is that these instruction (in first file):

if.end11:                                         ; preds = %if.end8
  %6 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322 
  %7 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  ...

cond.end:                                         ; preds = %cond.false,
%cond.true
  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
  %10 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %10 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg !322
  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg
!322
  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg
!322
  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %6, i8* %7, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0, i8*
%arraydecay), !dbg !322
  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
  br label %return, !dbg !323


are the same in the second file:

if.end11:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  ...

cond.end:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
  %24 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %24 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg !322
  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg
!322
  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg
!322
  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0, i8*
%arraydecay), !dbg !322
  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
  store i32 14, i32* %switchVar
  br label %loopEnd

I don't understant why the first time I don't have a dominate problem,
but the second time I do (I'm pretty sure it's because of the rest of my
pass but I can't figure where because the code that cause problem it's
the same in the both version).

Any idea?

Thx,
Cheers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: safer.phi.ll
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4520 bytes
Desc: safer.phi.ll
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120820/0b0984ab/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: safer.phi.obfu.ll
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 6012 bytes
Desc: safer.phi.obfu.ll
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120820/0b0984ab/attachment-0001.obj>

Cameron Zwarich

2012-Aug-20 19:06 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

In your original file, %6 is defined in if.end11 and is used in cond.end.
if.end11 branches to cond.true and cond.false, both of which branch
unconditionally to cond.end. Therefore %6 dominates its use.

In your second file %18 is defined in end.11 and used in cond.end. However,
end.11 no longer dominates cond.end because you have rewritten all branches to
go through the switch statement in loopEntry, and it is possible to take the
path from entry to loopEntry to cond.end without going through end.11.

Cameron

On Aug 20, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Rinaldini Julien <julien.rinaldini at
heig-vd.ch> wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm having some trouble with a pass I'm writing.
> 
> I'm using DemotePHIToStack to remove all phi node in my code with this
code (this is the first thing I do in my pass):
> 
>    // Erase phi node
>    vector<PHINode*> phis;
>    for (Function::iterator i=f->begin();i!=f->end();++i) {
>        for(BasicBlock::iterator b=i->begin();b!=i->end();++b) {
>            if(isa<PHINode>(b)) {
>                PHINode *phi= cast<PHINode>(b);
>                phis.push_back(phi);
>            }   
>        }   
>    }   
> 
>    for(vector<PHINode*>::iterator i=phis.begin();i!=phis.end();++i) {
>        PHINode *phi = *i; 
>        DemotePHIToStack(phi,NULL);
>    }
> 
> If I only run this code, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.ll).
> If I run the rest of my pass, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.obfu.ll)
> 
> And I got this error for the file safer.phi.obfu.ll:
> 
> Instruction does not dominate all uses!
>  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
> Instruction does not dominate all uses!
>  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
> Broken module found, compilation aborted!
> 0  opt             0x0000000000946d3f
> 1  opt             0x0000000000947229
> 2  libpthread.so.0 0x00007fcba9ff2170
> 3  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925dfa5 gsignal + 53
> 4  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925f428 abort + 328 
> 5  opt             0x000000000090951d
> 6  opt             0x00000000008e609f
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) + 607
> 7  opt             0x00000000008e60f3
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 51
> 8  opt             0x00000000008e5c6c
llvm::MPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 524
> 9  opt             0x00000000008e5d77
llvm::PassManagerImpl::run(llvm::Module&) + 151
> 10 opt             0x00000000004a1d99 main + 3385
> 11 libc.so.6       0x00007fcba924a725 __libc_start_main + 245 
> 12 opt             0x00000000004a6135
> Stack dump:
> 0.  Program arguments: opt -load
../../../build/Release+Asserts/lib/LLVMobfuscation.so -flattening
src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -o src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -stats
> 1.  Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module
'src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc'.
> 2.  Running pass 'Module Verifier' on function
'@safer_k64_setup'
> make: *** [src/ciphers/safer/safer.o] Aborted
> 
> 
> So the problem come from the bloc if.end11 and cond.end. I understand the
dominate problem, but the thing is that these instruction (in first file):
> 
> if.end11:                                         ; preds = %if.end8
>  %6 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322 
>  %7 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  ...
> 
> cond.end:                                         ; preds = %cond.false,
%cond.true
>  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
>  %10 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %10 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg
!322
>  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %6, i8* %7, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
>  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
>  br label %return, !dbg !323
> 
> 
> are the same in the second file:
> 
> if.end11:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
>  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  ...
> 
> cond.end:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
>  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
>  %24 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %24 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg
!322
>  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
>  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
>  store i32 14, i32* %switchVar
>  br label %loopEnd
> 
> I don't understant why the first time I don't have a dominate
problem, but the second time I do (I'm pretty sure it's because of the
rest of my pass but I can't figure where because the code that cause problem
it's the same in the both version).
> 
> Any idea?
> 
> Thx,
>
Cheers<safer.phi.ll><safer.phi.obfu.ll>_______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Rinaldini Julien

2012-Aug-21 09:03 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] RE : Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

Oh ok I see the problem...

Thank you very much

Cheers
________________________________________
De : Cameron Zwarich [zwarich at apple.com]
Date d'envoi : lundi 20 août 2012 21:06
À : Rinaldini Julien
Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List
Objet : Re: [LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

In your original file, %6 is defined in if.end11 and is used in cond.end.
if.end11 branches to cond.true and cond.false, both of which branch
unconditionally to cond.end. Therefore %6 dominates its use.

In your second file %18 is defined in end.11 and used in cond.end. However,
end.11 no longer dominates cond.end because you have rewritten all branches to
go through the switch statement in loopEntry, and it is possible to take the
path from entry to loopEntry to cond.end without going through end.11.

Cameron

On Aug 20, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Rinaldini Julien <julien.rinaldini at
heig-vd.ch> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm having some trouble with a pass I'm writing.
>
> I'm using DemotePHIToStack to remove all phi node in my code with this
code (this is the first thing I do in my pass):
>
>    // Erase phi node
>    vector<PHINode*> phis;
>    for (Function::iterator i=f->begin();i!=f->end();++i) {
>        for(BasicBlock::iterator b=i->begin();b!=i->end();++b) {
>            if(isa<PHINode>(b)) {
>                PHINode *phi= cast<PHINode>(b);
>                phis.push_back(phi);
>            }
>        }
>    }
>
>    for(vector<PHINode*>::iterator i=phis.begin();i!=phis.end();++i) {
>        PHINode *phi = *i;
>        DemotePHIToStack(phi,NULL);
>    }
>
> If I only run this code, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.ll).
> If I run the rest of my pass, I obtain this code (see safer.phi.obfu.ll)
>
> And I got this error for the file safer.phi.obfu.ll:
>
> Instruction does not dominate all uses!
>  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
> Instruction does not dominate all uses!
>  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
> Broken module found, compilation aborted!
> 0  opt             0x0000000000946d3f
> 1  opt             0x0000000000947229
> 2  libpthread.so.0 0x00007fcba9ff2170
> 3  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925dfa5 gsignal + 53
> 4  libc.so.6       0x00007fcba925f428 abort + 328
> 5  opt             0x000000000090951d
> 6  opt             0x00000000008e609f
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) + 607
> 7  opt             0x00000000008e60f3
llvm::FPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 51
> 8  opt             0x00000000008e5c6c
llvm::MPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) + 524
> 9  opt             0x00000000008e5d77
llvm::PassManagerImpl::run(llvm::Module&) + 151
> 10 opt             0x00000000004a1d99 main + 3385
> 11 libc.so.6       0x00007fcba924a725 __libc_start_main + 245
> 12 opt             0x00000000004a6135
> Stack dump:
> 0.  Program arguments: opt -load
../../../build/Release+Asserts/lib/LLVMobfuscation.so -flattening
src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -o src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc -stats
> 1.  Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module
'src/ciphers/safer/safer.bc'.
> 2.  Running pass 'Module Verifier' on function
'@safer_k64_setup'
> make: *** [src/ciphers/safer/safer.o] Aborted
>
>
> So the problem come from the bloc if.end11 and cond.end. I understand the
dominate problem, but the thing is that these instruction (in first file):
>
> if.end11:                                         ; preds = %if.end8
>  %6 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %7 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  ...
>
> cond.end:                                         ; preds = %cond.false,
%cond.true
>  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
>  %10 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %10 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg
!322
>  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %6, i8* %7, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
>  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
>  br label %return, !dbg !323
>
>
> are the same in the second file:
>
> if.end11:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
>  %18 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %19 = load i8** %key.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  ...
>
> cond.end:                                         ; preds = %loopEntry
>  %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem
>  %24 = load %union.Symmetric_key** %skey.addr, align 8, !dbg !322
>  %safer = bitcast %union.Symmetric_key* %24 to %struct.safer_key*, !dbg
!322
>  %key13 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.safer_key* %safer, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  %arraydecay = getelementptr inbounds [217 x i8]* %key13, i32 0, i32 0,
!dbg !322
>  call void @Safer_Expand_Userkey(i8* %18, i8* %19, i32 %cond.reload, i32 0,
i8* %arraydecay), !dbg !322
>  store i32 0, i32* %retval, !dbg !323
>  store i32 14, i32* %switchVar
>  br label %loopEnd
>
> I don't understant why the first time I don't have a dominate
problem, but the second time I do (I'm pretty sure it's because of the
rest of my pass but I can't figure where because the code that cause problem
it's the same in the both version).
>
> Any idea?
>
> Thx,
>
Cheers<safer.phi.ll><safer.phi.obfu.ll>_______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Rinaldini Julien

2012-Aug-21 09:20 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] RE : Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

I have another question.

DemotePHIToStack is not supposed to get rid of this problem, by replacing the
instruction with a pointer and so there is no more dominance problem ?

Cheers

ps: sorry for double post
> In your original file, %6 is defined in if.end11 and is used in cond.end.
if.end11 branches to cond.true and cond.false, both of which branch
unconditionally to cond.end. Therefore %6 dominates its use.
>
> In your second file %18 is defined in end.11 and used in cond.end. However,
end.11 no longer dominates cond.end because you have rewritten all branches to
go through the switch statement in loopEntry, and it is possible to take the
path from
> entry to loopEntry to cond.end without going through end.11.
> Cameron

Maybe Matching Threads

Search for more reasonably related threads

llvm dev - Aug 2012 - [LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

[LLVMdev] RE : Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

[LLVMdev] RE : Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"

Maybe Matching Threads