search for: dbginfointrinsics

Hi LLVM, If I have an llvm value "<16 x float> addrspace(1)* %in", and in the LLVM IR, there is a @llvm.dbg.value like: call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata <16 x float> addrspace(1)* %in, i64 0, metadata !216, metadata !28), !dbg !217 How I can retrieve this @llvm.dbg.value when I have "%in"? Since Metadata is not a part of the uselist anymore, is there some way

I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get this error: /Users/bocchino/llvm-checkin/src/include/llvm/IntrinsicInst.h: In static member function 'static bool llvm::DbgInfoIntrinsic::classof (const llvm::IntrinsicInst*)': /Users/bocchino/llvm-checkin/src/include/llvm/IntrinsicInst.h:77: error: 'dbg_declare' is not a member of 'llvm::Intrinsic'

2012/2/3 Patrik Hägglund <patrik.h.hagglund at ericsson.com>: > Hi, > > I've tracked the first problem (mentioned in my previous email, quoted > below) down further, ending up in the handling of alloca in > LoopRotation.cpp (from trunk): > >      // If the instruction's operands are invariant and it doesn't read > or write >      // memory, then it is

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get this error: Are you sure that no conflicts prevented updating from going smoothly? How are you building (srcdir ==/!= objdir)? -Chris > /Users/bocchino/llvm-checkin/src/include/llvm/IntrinsicInst.h: In static > member function 'static bool

On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> > wrote: >> >> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Eli

I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This is on persephone. Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh tree and try to compile it? Rob On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: >> I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get >> this

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at

...ion when such information interferes with > optimization.  Is this correct, Yes. > and if so, does anyone know off-hand > which optimizations do this? The optimizer does not emit any statistics here. You can search various transformation passes' code to see whether they are handling DbgInfoIntrinsics or not. Or may be I misunderstood your question ? > 2) I believe a new debug annotation design is being implemented in > mainline LLVM for the 2.7 release.  What is the current status of this > work?  Does it already yield more accurate debug information than LLVM 2.6? It is still a work...

Dear All, 1) I recall reading somewhere that a few optimizations in LLVM 2.6 strip away debug information when such information interferes with optimization. Is this correct, and if so, does anyone know off-hand which optimizations do this? 2) I believe a new debug annotation design is being implemented in mainline LLVM for the 2.7 release. What is the current status of this work? Does

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at

I've done several CVS head builds today .. no problems on Linux. Reid. On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 11:53 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > > > I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This > > is on persephone. > > > > Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This > is on persephone. > > Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh tree and > try to compile it? Nope, I don't think anyone else is getting this error. If you could try a fresh build that would be great, I'll fire

On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> > wrote: >> >> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Eli

Hi, I've tracked the first problem (mentioned in my previous email, quoted below) down further, ending up in the handling of alloca in LoopRotation.cpp (from trunk): // If the instruction's operands are invariant and it doesn't read or write // memory, then it is safe to hoist. Doing this doesn't change the order of // execution in the preheader, but does

I'm guessing the problem occurred because I hadn't updated in a while (maybe a couple of weeks?) and I had an old Intrinsics.gen file hanging around in my source directory that was getting picked up by the makefile for some reason. This is a bug, but maybe it's harmless because there's a onetime workaround (delete the file by hand) and it won't be a problem for

Hi, I have two problems regarding the llvm.stackrestore intrinsic. I'm running on 3.0, but a quick test on trunk also showed the same behavior. First problem: --------------- I have code like: tmp1 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp2 = alloca [do some stuff with tmp2] call llvm.stackrestore(tmp1) [some other stuff] tmp3 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp4 = alloca [do some stuff

There are a few instrinsic functions I would like to remove, is this possible? For example, the llvm.lifetime and llvm.dbg instrinsics? You can't simply iterate over the funciton and remove the call instructions, this causes issues. Is there a known structured way of doing this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

OK, when I copy $(SRCDIR)/include/llvm/Intrinsics.gen to $(OBJDIR)/ include/llvm/ by hand after building (and failing) once, the build succeeds. This is definitely a makefile bug. Rob On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: >> I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get >> this error: > >

On 11/24/2010 03:36 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Andrew Clinton wrote: >> Most of my programs contain loops that the LoopDeletion pass is unable >> to remove. It appears that the following code in LoopDeletion.cpp:152 >> is the culprit: >> >> ScalarEvolution& SE = getAnalysis<ScalarEvolution>(); >> const SCEV *S =

For the sample profiler, I need to determine the location of the first user instruction in the function. This can be the LOC where the function header is or the LOC of the actual first instruction, it doesn't really matter. But it needs to be consistent wrt -g and -gline-tables-only. Currently, I'm scanning for the first non-zero line number from the top of the function. This skips over