search for: createadd

...3, Craig Topper wrote: > Don't the CreateICmp calls return a Value* with an i1 type? But then > they are added to an i8 type? Not sure that works.  I had that initially: auto cf = IRB.CreateICmpULT(Incr, ConstantInt::get(Int8Ty, 1)); auto carry = IRB.CreateZExt(cf, Int8Ty); Incr = IRB.CreateAdd(Incr, carry); it makes no difference to the generated assembly > Have you tried using the llvm.uadd.with.overflow.i8 intrinsic? we have tried this: CallInst *AddOv = IRB.CreateBinaryIntrinsic(Intrinsic::uadd_with_overflow, Counter, ConstantInt::get(Int8Ty, 1)); AddOv->setMetadata(M.getM...

...eded add cl,0x1 // <- should be done to dl instead adc dl,0x1 mov BYTE PTR [rsi+rdi*1],dl Far below are both variants with the full code around it, however the difference in both variants is this: //variant1 auto cf = IRB.CreateICmpEQ(Incr, ConstantInt::get(Int8Ty, 0)); Incr = IRB.CreateAdd(Incr, cf); //variant2 auto cf = IRB.CreateICmpULT(Incr, ConstantInt::get(Int8Ty, 1)); Incr = IRB.CreateAdd(Incr, cf); //interestingly this totally different approach creates the same instructions as variant2 CallInst *AddOv = IRB.CreateBinaryIntrinsic(Intrinsic::uadd_with_over flow, Counter, Cons...

...-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] IRBuilder Assignment ( '=' ) operator? Hi Paul, On 15 March 2016 at 17:59, Paul Hancock via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > In my code assembly system I have the various LH-RH operators, ADD, ADDF, > SUB, etc, using CreateAdd, CreateFAdd, etc, however I cant seem to locate > the correct function/s for the assignment operator. The assignment is automatic. The pointer you get back from CreateAdd can be used directly in other instructions. When this is transcribed to the textual IR, LLVM will put in the appropriate ass...

In my code assembly system I have the various LH-RH operators, ADD, ADDF, SUB, etc, using CreateAdd, CreateFAdd, etc, however I cant seem to locate the correct function/s for the assignment operator. What's the correct function/s in the IRBuilder for assigning a value? - Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/l...

...man <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> Sent: 16 March 2016 14:24 To: Paul Hancock Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] IRBuilder Assignment ( '=' ) operator? There is a store operation if you want the value on the stack or heap, but there is no assignment operator in IR. CreateAdd returns an Instruction which represents both the operation and the result value. Value's are immutable and can be used as input arguments to any Instruction further down the control flow. The other thing you might need to research is the Phi Instruction. Which gives you a way to specify how th...

...ttp://llvm.org/releases/2.6/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#coreimprovements>. > > Interesting -- then I guess my question is why 2.8 (which is the first version of LLVM I've used) didn't flag this? > > Either way, it makes sense and changing my API usage to call CreateFAdd instead of CreateAdd fixes this. For a while, we kept some API backwards compatibility magic in place which would forward creations of adds into creations of fadds. Nick

Hi, From the file HowToUseJIT.cpp, I learned how to insert some calcuation IR code like Add/Sub/Mul etc by using Instruction *Add = BinaryOperator::createAdd(One, ArgX, "addresult", BB); By following this way, it works well when I insert some IR code whose operand is integer type like IntTy, however, when I tried to insert similar thing whose operands are float point, I got the following message when I run it void llvm::BinaryOperator::init(...

...re is part of the runOnFunction() method of my function pass: ... LLVMContext &Context = F.getContext(); IRBuilder<> builder(&Instruction); Value *Lef = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt32Ty(Context), 4); Value *Rig = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt32Ty(Context), 5); Value *Result = builder.CreateAdd(Lef, Rig); ... It seems that the problem is with the ConstantInt::get() function. Any idea? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180807/3565bd7b/attachment.html>

...t started using llvm. I was trying to debug how *clang* generates IR for very simple C testcases (few assignments and if-condsitions). To get a hold on the basic functions, I put some break points on following functions but debugger *didn't stop*: llvm::BasicBlock::Create llvm::BinaryOperator::CreateAdd (design has binary op) llvm::Value::Value llvm::BranchInst::Create (design has if/else) ... and quite a few The command line I used : *clang -S test.c -emit-llvm -o - * Here I could see the entire LLVM code generated and shown in stdout. I am almost sure that I have missed something very basic....

...ionVisitor::incrementGlobalKey(Instruction* I) { IRBuilder<> Builder(I->getContext()); Builder.SetInsertPoint(I->getNextNode()); GlobalVariable* key = I->getModule()->getNamedGlobal("globalKey"); if (key) { LoadInst* load = Builder.CreateLoad(key); Value* inc = Builder.CreateAdd(load, Builder.getInt64(1)); StoreInst* store = Builder.CreateStore(inc, key); return store; } return I; } Instruction* InstructionVisitor::print(Instruction* I, const char* text, Value* arg1, Value* arg2, Value* arg3, Value* arg4) { Function* printfFn = I->getModule()->getFunction("prin...

...ctionVisitor I try to update it like that: IRBuilder<> Builder(I->getContext());Builder.SetInsertPoint(I->getNextNode()); GlobalVariable* key = I->getModule()->getNamedGlobal("globalKey"); if (key) { LoadInst* load = Builder.CreateLoad(key); Value* inc = Builder.CreateAdd(load, Builder.getInt64(1)); StoreInst* store = Builder.CreateStore(inc, key);} I print that global variable during execution of instrumented code. I access it's value by key->getOperand(0), but it's unchanged. I'm using ORC JIT based on this tutorial: https://llvm.org/docs/tutor...

...rty/llvm/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineAddSub.cpp:48251%257Cdef&l=1471&gsn=Res> = BinaryOperator <https://cs.corp.google.com/#piper///depot/google3/third_party/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/IR/InstrTypes.h&ct=xref_jump_to_def&cl=GROK&l=138&gsn=BinaryOperator>::CreateAdd(Op0 <https://cs.corp.google.com/#piper///depot/google3/third_party/llvm/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineAddSub.cpp&ct=xref_jump_to_def&cl=GROK&l=1456&gsn=Op0>, V <https://cs.corp.google.com/#piper///depot/google3/third_party/llvm/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/I...

On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 15:31:57 -0500, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > Applied in r106468, thanks! > > -Chris I think there's a few bugs left in the Kaleidoscope tutorial -- I noticed somebody converted some of the "Builder.CreateAdd" to CreateFAdd, etc., but there seem to be a few that got missed. Attached diff is what I could find... Kevin Kelley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Kaleidoscope-fadd.diff Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2266 bytes Desc: not availab...

On 30 July 2011 23:39, Gregory Junker <gjunker at dayark.com> wrote: >> From: Nick Lewycky [mailto:nicholas at mxc.ca] [snip] >> Gregory Junker wrote: >> > That doesn't make a lot of sense to me -- LLVM can't add doubles? >> >> No, LLVM can't, but it can fadd them. ;) "add" only accepts integers >> and >> vectors of integers,

...here: > <http://llvm.org/releases/2.6/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#coreimprovements>. Interesting -- then I guess my question is why 2.8 (which is the first version of LLVM I've used) didn't flag this? Either way, it makes sense and changing my API usage to call CreateFAdd instead of CreateAdd fixes this. Thanks Greg

...cs/ReleaseNotes.html#coreimprovements>. > > > > Interesting -- then I guess my question is why 2.8 (which is the > first version of LLVM I've used) didn't flag this? > > > > Either way, it makes sense and changing my API usage to call > CreateFAdd instead of CreateAdd fixes this. > > For a while, we kept some API backwards compatibility magic in place > which would forward creations of adds into creations of fadds. > > Nick Figured it might be something like that. ;) Thanks again! Greg

On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 11:31:57AM +0100, Joey wrote: > Sounds like you are using the C++ API. > > You can store the value like: > Value *val = Builder.CreateCall(...); > > Then, for example, you can do: > Builder.CreateAdd(val, val); That looks a lot like what I am trying to do. I will assume that my problem is either caused by my environment (VC7.1) or by the fact that I am using an older version of llvm (2.5). Will upgrade my llvm and report back if my problem persists. Adelle.

...lue *TIdY = getWorkitemID(Builder, 1); Value *TIdZ = getWorkitemID(Builder, 2); Value *Tmp0 = Builder.CreateMul(TCntY, TCntZ, "", true, true); Tmp0 = Builder.CreateMul(Tmp0, TIdX); Value *Tmp1 = Builder.CreateMul(TIdY, TCntZ, "", true, true); Value *TID = Builder.CreateAdd(Tmp0, Tmp1); TID = Builder.CreateAdd(TID, TIdZ); it assumes that we enable 3 dims already? actually, it's not the case for SI. SI only enable dim-x for non-shader programs by default(SIMachinefunctionInfo.cpp) . does it conflict? thanks, --lx -------------- next part -------------- A...

...with Alloca, for example). 2. The instruction ctors all default construct an std::string. In practice, this is a very modest overhead, but if it isn't needed, it shouldn't happen. 3. Some of the construction APIs are very verbose, my "favorite" being BinaryOperator::createAdd and friends. The new API separates the idea of what to construct from where to insert it. In particular, when you create an LLVMBuilder object, you can tell it where to insert all subsequently created instructions. This means you end up writing code like this: LLVMBuilder B; B.SetInsertPoint...

...nge the type of an integer variable. For instance, > given the instruction "%3 = add i32 %1, %2" I would like to alter the > instruction to "%3 = add i16 %1, %2". Is there any way to do this? > No. Instead you create a new Instruction, in this case with BinaryOperator::CreateAdd, then OldInst->replaceAllUsesWith(NewInst) to update all the users, then OldInst->eraseFromParent() since it's now dead code. Also, all values have types immutably assigned at creation, so you'll need to insert casts (trunc instructions in your case) to cast %1 and %2 from i32 to i16...