search for: dventry

...ces. However, it is a conservative analysis and will sometimes suggest there may be more dependences than actually exist. In your example, I expect the analysis is confused for some reason and is returning the default confused response. You could test it using the isConfused() method. Note that the DVEntry::ALL direction is always valid. A distance of NULL is similarly valid; it merely indicates that the analysis couldn't figure out a fixed distance (or perhaps one doesn't exit). In your example, there's certainly a dependence from the load to the store. I'd expect it to report a con...

...pass. But the flow, anti dependence, etc methods are only reporting sequential and not loop carried dependencies. Does LLVM support loop carried dependency analysis? In addition, the distance and direction for dependent instructions always have invalid values; Dependence::getDirection() returns DVEntry::ALL which is the default value and Dependence::getDistance always returns null. E.g, for this input loop: for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++) { arr[i] = arr[i-1]; } This dependence is reported: %1 = load i32* %arrayidx.i, align 4 ---> store i32 %1, i32* %arrayidx2.i, align 4 And the foll...