search for: bidirectional_iterator_tag

...00802c8b4e2 in llvm::MachineFunction::CreateMachineInstr > (this=0x30eb000, TID=@0x803a78940, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, > NoImp=false) at /tmp/llvm-svn/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp:153 > #2 0x00000008028ea45b in llvm::BuildMI (BB=@0x4b69378, > I={<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, llvm::MachineInstr, > long int, llvm::MachineInstr*, llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data > fields>}, NodePtr = 0x4b69440}, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, > TID=@0x803a78940) at MachineInstrBuilder.h:183 > #3 0x0000000803451825 in llvm::X86RegisterInfo::emitPrologue &gt...

...eFunction::CreateMachineInstr >> (this=0x30eb000, TID=@0x803a78940, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, >> NoImp=false) at /tmp/llvm-svn/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp: >> 153 >> #2 0x00000008028ea45b in llvm::BuildMI (BB=@0x4b69378, >> I={<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, >> llvm::MachineInstr, >> long int, llvm::MachineInstr*, llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data >> fields>}, NodePtr = 0x4b69440}, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, >> TID=@0x803a78940) at MachineInstrBuilder.h:183 >> #3 0x0000000803451825 in llvm::X86Reg...

...ated: #1 0x0000000802c8b4e2 in llvm::MachineFunction::CreateMachineInstr (this=0x30eb000, TID=@0x803a78940, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, NoImp=false) at /tmp/llvm-svn/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp:153 #2 0x00000008028ea45b in llvm::BuildMI (BB=@0x4b69378, I={<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, llvm::MachineInstr, long int, llvm::MachineInstr*, llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x4b69440}, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, TID=@0x803a78940) at MachineInstrBuilder.h:183 #3 0x0000000803451825 in llvm::X86RegisterInfo::emitPrologue (this=0x1a96220, MF=...

On Aug 27, 2010, at 11:00 AMPDT, Eric Christopher wrote: >>> >>> For some reason I am getting this error even when I only have an >>> empty 'main' function. So I couldn't create .ll file reproducing >>> it and I have to debug myself. >>> >>> The function causing the problem is stub created in >>> JIT::runFunction:

...eInstr>, int> ( > __i=@0xbfbfe880, __n=-1) at stl_iterator_base_funcs.h:177 > #4 0x08550339 in > llvm::prior<llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr> > (it= > {<bidirectional_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr,int>> = > {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,llvm::MachineInstr,int > ,llvm::MachineInstr*,llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data fields>}, > <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x5a5a5a5a}) > at STLExtras.h:154 > #5 0x085c08c8 in LoadStoreMultipleOpti (this=0x29005ec0, > MBB=@0x2904c400) > at /home/e...

...rst): #1 0x0000000802c8b4e2 in llvm::MachineFunction::CreateMachineInstr (this=0x30eb000, TID=@0x803a99240, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, NoImp=false) at /tmp/llvm-svn/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp:153 #2 0x00000008028ea45b in llvm::BuildMI (BB=@0x4b69378, I={<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, llvm::MachineInstr, long int, llvm::MachineInstr*, llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x4b69388}, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, TID=@0x803a99240) at MachineInstrBuilder.h:183 #3 0x00000008033c7637 in X86SelectRet (this=0x4530f30, I=0x493f240) at /tmp/llvm-...

...list_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr>, int> ( __i=@0xbfbfe880, __n=-1) at stl_iterator_base_funcs.h:177 #4 0x08550339 in llvm::prior<llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr> > (it= {<bidirectional_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr,int>> = {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,llvm::MachineInstr,int,llvm::MachineInstr*,llvm::MachineInstr&>> = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x5a5a5a5a}) at STLExtras.h:154 #5 0x085c08c8 in LoadStoreMultipleOpti (this=0x29005ec0, MBB=@0x2904c400) at /home/emil/ll/llvm-2.1/lib/Target/ARM/ARMLo...

...r<std::bid\ irectional_iterator_tag ,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x1604dd0}, End={<bidirectional_iterat\ or<llvm::Instruction,int>> = {< std ::iterator < std ::bidirectional_iterator_tag ,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> = {<No data fields>}, <No data field\ s>}, NodePtr = 0x16049e0}) at SelectionDAGISel.cpp:500 #15 0x005ef123 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectAllBasicBlocks (this=0x1608780, Fn=@0x1603720, MF=@0x160d520, MMI=0x...

On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 06:41:38PM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote: > The "make check" produced: > === Summary === > > # of expected passes 2209 > # of unexpected failures 41 > # of expected failures 5 > gmake[1]: *** [check-local] Error 1 > gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/emil/ll/objdir-llvm/test' > gmake: ***

...::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> = > {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x1604dd0}, > End={<bidirectional_iterat\ > or<llvm::Instruction,int>> = > {< > std > ::iterator > < > std > ::bidirectional_iterator_tag > ,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> = > {<No data fields>}, <No data field\ > s>}, NodePtr = 0x16049e0}) at SelectionDAGISel.cpp:500 > #15 0x005ef123 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectAllBasicBlocks > (this=0x1608780, Fn=@0x16037...

...ctional_iterator_tag,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> >> = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x1604dd0}, >> End={<bidirectional_iterat\ >> or<llvm::Instruction,int>> = >> {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> >> = {<No data fields>}, <No data field\ >> s>}, NodePtr = 0x16049e0}) at SelectionDAGISel.cpp:500 >> #15 0x005ef123 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectAllBasicBlocks >> (this=0x1608780, Fn=@0x...

...d::bid\ > irectional_iterator_tag,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> > = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x1604dd0}, > End={<bidirectional_iterat\ > or<llvm::Instruction,int>> = > {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> > = {<No data fields>}, <No data field\ > s>}, NodePtr = 0x16049e0}) at SelectionDAGISel.cpp:500 > #15 0x005ef123 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectAllBasicBlocks > (this=0x1608780, Fn=@0x1603720, MF=@0x1...

...xport/home/karel/vcs/llvm-2.9/include/llvm/Instruction.def:161 #11 0x08acf7be in llvm::SelectionDAGBuilder::visit (this=0x92be358, I=@0x92b4500) at SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp:864 #12 0x08b02903 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectBasicBlock (this=0x92bdb50, Begin= {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,const llvm::Instruction,ptrdiff_t,const llvm::Instruction*,const llvm::Instruction&>> = {<No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x92b41ac}, End= {<std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag,const llvm::Instruction,ptrdiff_t,const llvm::Instruction*,const llvm::Instruction&...

...,llvm::Instruction&>> = >> {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>}, NodePtr = 0x1604dd0}, >> End={<bidirectional_iterat\ >> or<llvm::Instruction,int>> = >> {< >> std >> ::iterator >> < >> std >> ::bidirectional_iterator_tag >> ,llvm::Instruction,int,llvm::Instruction*,llvm::Instruction&>> = >> {<No data fields>}, <No data field\ >> s>}, NodePtr = 0x16049e0}) at SelectionDAGISel.cpp:500 >> #15 0x005ef123 in llvm::SelectionDAGISel::SelectAllBasicBlocks >> (this=0x...

Hello, I think there's a rather subtle problem with the inst_iterator. It declares its iterator category as std::bidirectional_iterator_tag but C++ standard requirements for forward iterator (which are included in requirements for bidirection iterator), say that the type of expression *r; should be T&, where 'r' is the iterator and T is its value type. The inst_iterator, though, returns pointer to Instruction, not...

Duncan: I'm still stymied how this whole thread ended up about shuffle vector nodes, when the original problem was my build vector patch. I'm still working on backing the build vector patch out (it isn't clean with all of the intervening commits and I have pressing management tasks which command my attention.) -scooter On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at

> 3. Introduce a new ShuffleVectorSDNode that only has two SDValue > operands (the two input vectors), but that also contains an array of > ints in the node (not as operands). ... > The important part of #3 is that we really want an array of ints > (using -1 for undef) for the shuffle mask, not "operands". This > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we