search for: createverifierpass

...t based on NDEBUG for lto.cpp, but in llvm-lto it always defaults to false. Is that intentional? - You mentioned that the verifier was currently being run 3 times: (1) after parsing, (2) at the beginning of the optimization pipeline, and (3) at the end of it. It looks to me like (1) is done via the createVerifierPass() added in LTOCodeGenerator::applyScopeRestrictions(). However, gold does not use LTOCodeGenerator, and I don't see it explicitly adding an initial createVerifierPass. So it looks like for gold it is only being called twice (beginning of optimization pipeline and at the end). So I think for gol...

> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of Sean Silva > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] What would cause instructions to NOT make it into the module? > It is a pass that can be run like any other pass. See createVerifierPass(). You can also just call verifyModule() with the appropriate parameters; it's defined in include/llvm/Analysis/Verifier.h. - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in...

...IRE: noassert” though. — Mehdi > > Teresa > >> - You mentioned that the verifier was currently being run 3 times: (1) >> after parsing, (2) at the beginning of the optimization pipeline, and >> (3) at the end of it. It looks to me like (1) is done via the >> createVerifierPass() added in >> LTOCodeGenerator::applyScopeRestrictions(). However, gold does not use >> LTOCodeGenerator, and I don't see it explicitly adding an initial >> createVerifierPass. So it looks like for gold it is only being called >> twice (beginning of optimization pipeline...

...e is a function verifyAnalysis() in Pass but it is empty. > So do you suggest implementing that function? If it is the case, what should > I look while implementing that function? Or something else altogether? I'm assuming you have a PassManager PM, in which case it would be 'PM.add(createVerifierPass());' which is equivalent to 'opt -verify foo.bc'. Please let me know what that turns up; even if it finds no problems that fact is still useful information. The webpage is http://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html#verify . Nick > > Thanks, > Nehal. > > -----Original Message--...

Hi Nick I am not quite sure what you meant by verifier. I checked online documents and found that there is a function verifyAnalysis() in Pass but it is empty. So do you suggest implementing that function? If it is the case, what should I look while implementing that function? Or something else altogether? Thanks, Nehal. -----Original Message----- From: Nick Lewycky [mailto:nicholas at mxc.ca]

On Jan 23, 2013, at 21:47 , Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > Try running the verifier pass (the one that is invoked by `opt -verify`). I'm not sure how to do this. I'm writing a Cocoa app that calls the LLVM API directly; I don't use any of the command-line tools. Is there a way to verify via API? I think I've actually done this for individual types, dunno

It is a pass that can be run like any other pass. See createVerifierPass(). -- Sean Silva On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Rick Mann <rmann at latencyzero.com> wrote: > > On Jan 23, 2013, at 21:47 , Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > >> Try running the verifier pass (the one that is invoked by `opt -verify`). > > I'm not s...

...;llvm/CodeGen/Passes.h" +#include "llvm/Support/MemoryBuffer.h" #include "llvm/Support/Streams.h" /// dummy_function - This is used when linking the LLVM libraries into a dynamic @@ -40,8 +41,10 @@ void dummy_function() { new llvm::ExistingModuleProvider(0); llvm::createVerifierPass(); - llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, llvm::cout); + llvm::CreateBitcodeWriterPass(*llvm::cout); + llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, *llvm::cout); llvm::ParseBitcodeFile(NULL); + llvm::MemoryBuffer::getNewMemBuffer(0); llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass(); llvm::createScalarReplAggregatesPass(...

...There was a change to the mirror in May 07, but it was just changing Bytecode -> Bitcode. My guess is the Evan's change didn't reach the mirror. Here is the function as it exists in the llvm-gcc-4.0 mirror today: void dummy_function() { new llvm::ExistingModuleProvider(0); llvm::createVerifierPass(); llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, llvm::cout); llvm::ParseBitcodeFile(NULL); ... and in llvm-gcc-4.2: void dummy_function() { new llvm::ExistingModuleProvider(0); llvm::createVerifierPass(); llvm::CreateBitcodeWriterPass(*llvm::cout); llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, *llvm::cout); llvm::Pars...

...unction. 4) I run the following pass: { PassManager PM; PM.add(new TargetData(*EE->getTargetData())); PM.add(createInstructionCombiningPass()); PM.run(*qModule); } I then run another pass: PassManager PM; PM.add(new TargetData(*EE->getTargetData())); PM.add(createVerifierPass()); //PM.add(createAndersensPass()); // Seems to break dynamic casts in combo with load value numbering PM.add(createLoadValueNumberingPass()); PM.add(createGCSEPass()); PM.add(createAggressiveDCEPass()); PM.add(createDeadInstEliminationPass()); PM.run(*qModule); Next, I call...

On Jul 13, 2007, at 9:28 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Chris, > >> This is probably a patch that got checked into llvm-gcc4 after devang >> started work on 4.2. Please feel free to update 4.2 to the version >> in >> 4.0. > > no, it doesn't exist in 4.0. hmm. that can not be true. It was applied by Evan on May 07, 2007 to unbreak Apple style builds. -

...rify" method in the Module class, but just for the records, I did this: --------------- PassManager Passes; // Add an appropriate TargetData instance for this module... Passes.add(new TargetData("save", ModuleToSave)); // Make sure the input LLVM is well formed. Passes.add(createVerifierPass()); Passes.run(*ModuleToSave); --------------- I got stuck in another problem. I suppose it's very simple but I do not really know what is happening. I have a module like this: ------------------------------------ %binary_tree__0 = type { int, %binary_tree__0*, %binary_tree__0* } ... %Ne...

Hi LLVM, I have a question about how to ensure one pass runs exactly after another pass. In the implementation of opt.cpp, if the VerifyEach is set, a Verifier from llvm::createVerifierPass() is added after each pass. Is this verifier called after the verified pass immediately? The interfaces of PassManager only allows us to specify which passes the current pass replies on, and if the the current pass breaks any existing passes. PassManager will schedule the pass at the right time w....

...+#include "llvm/Support/MemoryBuffer.h" > #include "llvm/Support/Streams.h" > > /// dummy_function - This is used when linking the LLVM libraries into a dynamic > @@ -40,8 +41,10 @@ > void dummy_function() { > new llvm::ExistingModuleProvider(0); > llvm::createVerifierPass(); > - llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, llvm::cout); > + llvm::CreateBitcodeWriterPass(*llvm::cout); > + llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(0, *llvm::cout); > llvm::ParseBitcodeFile(NULL); > + llvm::MemoryBuffer::getNewMemBuffer(0); > > llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass(); > l...

...;; return 1; } TargetMachine* target = MArch->CtorFn(*M, ""); assert(target && "Could not allocate target machine!"); FunctionPassManager Passes(new ExistingModuleProvider(M)); Passes.add(new TargetData(*target->getTargetData())); Passes.add(createVerifierPass()); switch (target->addPassesToEmitFile(Passes, std::cout, TargetMachine::AssemblyFile, false)) { default: assert(0 && "Invalid file model!"); return 1; case FileModel::MachOFile: case FileModel::ElfFile: case FileModel::Error: std::cerr <<...

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 01:10:42AM +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:43 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < > dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 2015-Aug-31, at 18:09, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith

...anagerBuilder().populateIPOPassManager(passes, + /*Internalize=*/false, + !DisableInline); + PassManagerBuilder().populatePostIPOPM(passes); + } // Make sure everything is still good. passes.add(createVerifierPass()); Index: tools/opt/opt.cpp =================================================================== --- tools/opt/opt.cpp (revision 187135) +++ tools/opt/opt.cpp (working copy) @@ -104,6 +104,11 @@ cl::desc("Include the standard compile time optimizations")); static cl...

Hi Ricardo, Yes, its because you have an invalid module. You should run Module::verify before attempting to write the bytecode. This will pinpoint the problem for you. However, I think I know what's going on: you've left an object (a Value not a Type) in the symbol table that is not in the Module. Not quite sure how you do that, but I suppose its possible if you manipulated the symbol

Hi All, llvm-gcc-4-2 development branch is now open for development at llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4-2 It is not yet ready, it can not even bootstrap. I welcome LLVM developers to test and apply fixes! However, first take a note of ground rules : 1) LLVM developers, use your write access as judiciously as you use it for LLVM development and follow same check-in procedure. 2)

Hello, I am receiving this error: assert(Slot != -1 && "Value in symtab but has no slot number!!"); While trying to generate a module at run time using LLVM classes. Specifically with an instance of StoreInst class. After I generate all the instructions, I try to save the Module to bytecode, but I receive that error in the method 'outputSymbolTable' Does anyone