search for: enable_expensive_check

Displaying 11 results from an estimated 11 matches for "enable_expensive_check".

2009 May 15
3
[LLVMdev] "Processed value not in any map!" failures
When I build LLVM with ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1, make check fails: Running /home/foad/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/dg.exp ... FAIL: /home/foad/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2007-05-14-InlineAsmCstCrash.ll Failed with signal(SIGABRT) at line 1 while running: llvm-as < /home/foad/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/t...
2009 May 15
0
[LLVMdev] "Processed value not in any map!" failures
Hi Jay, > When I build LLVM with ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1, make check fails: > > Running /home/foad/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/dg.exp ... > FAIL: /home/foad/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2007-05-14-InlineAsmCstCrash.ll > Failed with signal(SIGABRT) at line 1 > while running: llvm-as < > /home/foad/...
2009 May 15
3
[LLVMdev] Removing std::vector from APIs (was Re: Mutating the elements of a ConstantArray)
...bit of a flaw in the plan. I suppose the solution is to switch to SmallVector whenever this might be a problem. I'm a bit concerned that any new &empty[0] problems that are introduced will go unnoticed. With GNU libstdc++ they aren't diagnosed unless you build with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG (or ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1). For now I'm testing with ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1, and it is indeed catching lots of errors! > (though it is safe for smallvector). DR 464 proposes a new data() method. I'd suggest implementing that in SmallVector, instead of relying on the relaxed checking in operator[](). htt...
2009 May 14
0
[LLVMdev] Removing std::vector from APIs (was Re: Mutating the elements of a ConstantArray)
On May 14, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > 2009/4/1 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: >> As far API design goes, we're in a mixed state. I'd strongly prefer >> to get rid of std::vector from the various interfaces, f.e. >> creating a >> constant array currently requires passing in an std::vector. For >> these sorts of interfaces, we
2017 Jul 17
2
An update on the DominatorTree and incremental dominators
...) on a DomTreeNode. - We have a new set of verifiers that are able to prove or disprove correctness of a DomTree -- you can explicitly do it by calling DT.verify(). The check has a disadvantage of being quite slow (O(n^3)), so the legacy DT.verifyDominatorTree() uses it only when ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECK is enabled, or when the -verify-dom-info command line option is set to 1. Some of the transforms assume that calling DT.verifyDomTree() is fast, so we cannot turn it on by default. - Dominators and Postdominators are now different types, i.e. IsPostDom is a template argument and not...
2009 May 14
2
[LLVMdev] Removing std::vector from APIs (was Re: Mutating the elements of a ConstantArray)
2009/4/1 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > As far API design goes, we're in a mixed state.  I'd strongly prefer > to get rid of std::vector from the various interfaces, f.e. creating a > constant array currently requires passing in an std::vector.  For > these sorts of interfaces, we should migrate to passing in a "Constant > *const* / unsigned" pair.
2009 May 15
0
[LLVMdev] Removing std::vector from APIs (was Re: Mutating the elements of a ConstantArray)
...afe to use &V[0] > > when V is an empty std::vector > > Oh dear. That's a bit of a flaw in the plan. I suppose the solution is > to switch to SmallVector whenever this might be a problem. Or use iterators. That's why they're there. > For now I'm testing with ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1, and it is indeed > catching lots of errors! Mm hmm. :) -Dave
2009 Jun 17
1
[LLVMdev] Configure problem of llvm2.5 in Mac OS X 10.4.11
...='' DATE='' DEBUG_RUNTIME='' DEFS='' DISABLE_ASSERTIONS='' DOT='' DOTTY='' DOXYGEN='' ECHO='echo' ECHO_C='' ECHO_N='-n' ECHO_T='' EGREP='' ENABLE_CBE_PRINTF_A='' ENABLE_DOXYGEN='' ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS='' ENABLE_OPTIMIZED='' ENABLE_PIC='' ENABLE_THREADS='' ENABLE_VISIBILITY_INLINES_HIDDEN='' ENDIAN='' EXEEXT='' EXPENSIVE_CHECKS='' EXTRA_OPTIONS='' F77='' FFLAGS='' FIND='' FLEX='' GAS=''...
2009 Sep 11
2
[LLVMdev] compiling clang with rtti
...with rtti enabled? Eventually I got it by editing every single Makefile in the "lib" sub-directories and commenting out the appropriate line "CXXFLAGS = -fno-rtti". However this can't be a proper solution. As stated earlier if REQUIRES_RTTI would be evaluated similiar to ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS regarding rtti then it would be easy to enable rtti for clang. OTOH I'm not a makefile expert (to be honest I'm very far away from it). Thus maybe I'm just overlooking the right way to enable rtti for the clang libs. <--END--> Thanks in advance for any help... Best regards O...
2010 Nov 29
3
[LLVMdev] Does someone has experience with Canadian cross build of LLVM compiler?
...--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; \ cd .. ; \ fi; \ (unset SDKROOT; \ make -C BuildTools \ BUILD_DIRS_ONLY=1 \ UNIVERSAL= \ ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 \ ENABLE_PROFILING= \ ENABLE_COVERAGE= \ DISABLE_ASSERTIONS=1 \ ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS= \ CFLAGS= \ CXXFLAGS= \ ) || exit 1; checking build system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu checking host system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu checking target system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu checking type of operating system we're going to host on... Linux checking type of operati...
2009 Jun 18
0
[LLVMdev] Configure problem of llvm2.5 in Mac OS X 10.4.11
...39;' > DISABLE_ASSERTIONS='' > DOT='' > DOTTY='' > DOXYGEN='' > ECHO='echo' > ECHO_C='' > ECHO_N='-n' > ECHO_T='' > EGREP='' > ENABLE_CBE_PRINTF_A='' > ENABLE_DOXYGEN='' > ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS='' > ENABLE_OPTIMIZED='' > ENABLE_PIC='' > ENABLE_THREADS='' > ENABLE_VISIBILITY_INLINES_HIDDEN='' > ENDIAN='' > EXEEXT='' > EXPENSIVE_CHECKS='' > EXTRA_OPTIONS='' > F77='' > FFLAGS='&...