Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "6baa52c9".
2009 Sep 22
1
[LLVMdev] Verifier should not make any assumptions about calls to "malloc"
...ooked at getMallocType() and it does not assume that the return
type of a malloc call is i8*, so I have removed this check from the
verifier.
Victor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090922/6baa52c9/attachment.html>
2009 Sep 22
0
[LLVMdev] Verifier should not make any assumptions about calls to "malloc"
Duncan,
Thanks for brining the Ada issue to my attention.
On Sep 22, 2009, at 6:11 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Victor, this code from the verifier broke the Ada front-end build:
>
> const Module* M = CI.getParent()->getParent()->getParent();
> Constant *MallocFunc = M->getFunction("malloc");
>
> if (CI.getOperand(0) == MallocFunc) {
> const
2009 Sep 22
5
[LLVMdev] Verifier should not make any assumptions about calls to "malloc"
Hi Victor, this code from the verifier broke the Ada front-end build:
const Module* M = CI.getParent()->getParent()->getParent();
Constant *MallocFunc = M->getFunction("malloc");
if (CI.getOperand(0) == MallocFunc) {
const PointerType *PTy =
PointerType::getUnqual(Type::getInt8Ty(CI.getParent()->getContext()));
Assert1(CI.getType() == PTy, "Malloc