search for: callbase

...an build a handful of APIs to dispatch between instructions with this property and expose successors. This should be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and InvokeInst to easily share logic: - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from Instruction that provides all of the common call logic - Make `CallInst` derive from this - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and successors - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it to use `CallBase`. The end...

...dispatch between instructions with this property and expose > successors. This should be really comparable to the existing code and > have nearly no down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and > InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from > Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and > successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it to...

...en instructions with this property and expose successors. This should >> be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. >> >> Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and >> InvokeInst to easily share logic: >> - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from Instruction >> that provides all of the common call logic >> - Make `CallInst` derive from this >> - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and >> successors >> - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying co...

...dispatch > between instructions with this property and expose successors. This should > be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and > InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from Instruction > that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and > successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it to...

...this property and expose successors. This should >>> be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. >>> >>> Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and >>> InvokeInst to easily share logic: >>> - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from >>> Instruction that provides all of the common call logic >>> - Make `CallInst` derive from this >>> - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and >>> successors >>> - Remove `CallSite` and...

...between instructions with this property and expose successors. This should > be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. > > > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and > InvokeInst to easily share logic: > > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from > Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and > successors > > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, r...

...ful of APIs to dispatch between instructions with this property and expose successors. This should be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it to use `CallB...

...spatch between instructions with this property and expose > successors. This should be really comparable to the existing code and > have nearly no down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and > InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from > Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and > successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it t...

...patch between instructions with this property and expose successors. > This should be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no > down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and > InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from > Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and > successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it t...

...ibutor, exactly in File Attributor.cpp, Function Attributor::rewriteFunctionSignatures(), Line No: 1600 (approrimate). The llvm source code at above address is as follows: // Eliminate the instructions *after* we visited all of them. for (auto &CallSitePair : CallSitePairs) { CallBase &OldCB = *CallSitePair.first; CallBase &NewCB = *CallSitePair.second; ModifiedFns.insert(OldCB.getFunction()); CGUpdater.replaceCallSite(OldCB, NewCB); OldCB.replaceAllUsesWith(&NewCB); <---------------------------------------- Failing location OldCB.e...

...utor.cpp, Function Attributor::rewriteFunctionSignatures(), Line No: 1600 (approrimate). > > The llvm source code at above address is as follows: > > // Eliminate the instructions *after* we visited all of them. > for (auto &CallSitePair : CallSitePairs) { > CallBase &OldCB = *CallSitePair.first; > CallBase &NewCB = *CallSitePair.second; > ModifiedFns.insert(OldCB.getFunction()); > CGUpdater.replaceCallSite(OldCB, NewCB); > OldCB.replaceAllUsesWith(&NewCB); <---------------------------------------- Failin...

...ful of APIs to dispatch between instructions with this property and expose successors. This should be really comparable to the existing code and have nearly no down sides. > > Then I propose we restructure the type system to allow CallInst and InvokeInst to easily share logic: > - Create `CallBase` which is an *abstract* class derived from Instruction that provides all of the common call logic > - Make `CallInst` derive from this > - Make `InvokeInst` derive from this, extend it for EH aspects and successors > - Remove `CallSite` and all accompanying code, rewriting it to use `CallB...

Hello, I am trying to replace a pointer argument of a call instruction with another pointer argument( new argument value for the call instruction). What is the best way to do it? I could not find any hint/guidance on the web or LLVM manual. Thanks, -- Abid M. Malik ****************************************************** "I have learned silence from the talkative, toleration from the

Hi Tim, I'm still struggling on the instruction: call void bitcast (void (%struct.png_struct_def.68*, i8*, i8* (%struct.png_struct_def.68*, i64)*, void (%struct.png_struct_def.68*, i8*)*)* @png_set_mem_fn to void (%struct.png_struct_def*, i8*, i8* (%struct.png_struct_def*, i64)*, void (%struct.png_struct_def*, i8*)*)*)(%struct.png_struct_def* %create_struct, i8* %mem_ptr, i8*

...bel after the keyword “to”, or to any of the “exceptional” >>> successors (which are expected to be normal basic blocks) denoted by labels >>> in the "or jump" list. >>> >>> The CallBrInst class implementing the instruction is a subclass of >>> CallBase and is used as a terminator. >>> >>> Support for asm-goto is implemented by using “void asm” as the callee >>> expression: >>> >>> callbr void asm sideeffect <flags> "<asm string>", >>> "<constraints...

...e language code), > denoted by the label after the keyword “to”, or to any of the “exceptional” > successors (which are expected to be normal basic blocks) denoted by labels > in the "or jump" list. > > The CallBrInst class implementing the instruction is a subclass of > CallBase and is used as a terminator. > > Support for asm-goto is implemented by using “void asm” as the callee > expression: > > callbr void asm sideeffect <flags> "<asm string>", > "<constraints>"(<argtype1> <arg1>, …, i8*...

...OptPass::tryMergingIntoMemset 5 llvm::InvokeInst::Create 4 llvm::ConstantHoistingPass::emitBaseConstants 4 llvm::CallBase::getParamByValType 4 llvm::OpenMPIRBuilder::getOrCreateIdent 3 getFoldedSizeOf 3 llvm::NV...