search for: erasefromparent

The code is really simple. But I can not the reason for the segmentation fault. I only know that the eraseFromParent() function leads to it. The whole code is: ... bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override { for (auto &I : instructions(F)) { if (auto* op = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(&I)) { IRBuilder<> builder(op); Value* lhs = op->getOperand(0); Value* rhs = op->getOperand(1); Value*...

...t;BinaryOperator>(I)) { IRBuilder<NoFolder> builder(op); Value* lhs = op->getOperand(0); Value* rhs = op->getOperand(1); Value* mul = builder.CreateMul(lhs, rhs); for (auto& U : op->uses()) { User* user = U.getUser(); user->setOperand(U.getOperandNo(), mul); } //I->eraseFromParent(); dels.push_back(I); } } for (auto &I : dels) { I->eraseFromParent(); } ... On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 6:16 PM, mayuyu.io <admin at mayuyu.io> wrote: > Hi: > As stated in the documentation you shouldn’t modify it while iterating as > this invalidates the iterator. Try save the...

I am confused by GlobalVariable::eraseFromParent's declaration: /// This method unlinks 'this' from the containing module and deletes it. void eraseFromParent(); In Globals.cpp the unlinking is done and SymbolTableListTraits cleans up the symbol table but I don't see anything that actually deletes the object. Is the comment...

Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in eraseFromParent(): While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! UNREACHABLE executed at /Users/neonomaly/LLVM/LLVM/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:561! Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail 21.04.2012, в 23:45, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > Михаил wrote: >>...

LLVM is built in Release mode. The version is 6.0.0. I think that a similar code worked on verison 3.9.0. It is probably a null pointer dereference occurring in eraseFromParent(). I checked and reconfirmed that the instruction had no uses. Perhaps I should rebuild LLVM. Thanks. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 9:03 PM, mayuyu.io <admin at mayuyu.io> wrote: > Hmmmm that’s strange. Do you get an assert when you build LLVM with this > code in Debug Mode or is it simply n...

...; From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Ahmad > Nouralizadeh via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 22:26 > To: paul.robinson at sony.com > Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Error Calling eraseFromParent() > > The code is really simple. But I can not the reason for the segmentation > fault. I only know that the eraseFromParent() function leads to it. The > whole code is: > ... > bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override { > > for (auto &I : instructions(F)) { > &gt...

...p = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(&I)) { Value* lhs = op->getOperand(0); Value* rhs = op->getOperand(1); Value* mul = builder.CreateMul(lhs, rhs); for (auto& U : op->uses()) { User* user = U.getUser(); user->setOperand(U.getOperandNo(), mul); } I.eraseFromParent(); } ... This leads to the following runtime error: LLVMSymbolizer: error reading file: No such file or directory ... Does anybody know the solution? Regards. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/201...

How correctly remove function from module? For example: int f1(int x) { ... a = f2(smth); ... } int f2 (int y) { ... b = f1(smth); ... } I need delete from module both f1 and f2. They haven't uses in other part of module, but I can't delete them with eraseFromParent, because they are use each other. Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120421/8f492716/attachment.html>

...module? > For example: > > int f1(int x) { > ... > a = f2(smth); > ... > } > int f2 (int y) { > ... > b = f1(smth); > ... > } > > I need delete from module both f1 and f2. They haven't uses in other > part of module, but I can't delete them with eraseFromParent, because > they are use each other. Call X->replaceAllUsesWith(UndefValue::get(X->getType)) before calling X->eraseFromParent(). Nick

Михаил wrote: > Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in > eraseFromParent(): > > While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi > An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! > UNREACHABLE executed at /Users/neonomaly/LLVM/LLVM/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:561! The replaceAllUsesWith + eraseFromParent pattern remains correct, but there's more to the...

It is ModulePass with AnalysisUsage of CallGraph Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail 22.04.2012, в 5:20, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > Михаил wrote: >> Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in >> eraseFromParent(): >> >> While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi >> An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! >> UNREACHABLE executed at /Users/neonomaly/LLVM/LLVM/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:561! > > The replaceAllUsesWith + eraseFromParent pattern remains correct, b...

...dant > unused instructions from the generated code, there is a seg fault error. > To remove them, I'm using this function: > > void EraseInst(Instruction &I) { > assert(I.use_empty() && "Cannot erase used instructions!"); > I.eraseFromParent(); > } The problem is in how you use it: for (BasicBlock::iterator I = BB->begin(), E = BB->end(); I != E; I++) { if (I->use_empty() && dyn_cast<LoadInst>(I)) { errs() << "*****Instruction unused*****" << "\n"; err...

...ally attempt to remove the redundant unused instructions from the generated code, there is a seg fault error. To remove them, I'm using this function: void EraseInst(Instruction &I) { assert(I.use_empty() && "Cannot erase used instructions!"); I.eraseFromParent(); } So please, if anyone could help me on this, i would be very grateful! PS: It's also following my pass and the bytecode used for tests. Thanks for the attention, Alysson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/ll...

...BasicBlock * BB = *bi; for (BasicBlock::iterator ii = BB->begin(), ii2; ii != BB->end(); ii= ii2) { ii2 = ii; ii2++; Instruction *inst = ii; inst->replaceAllUsesWith(UndefValue::get(inst->getType())); inst->eraseFromParent(); } for (pred_iterator PI = pred_begin(BB); PI != pred_end(BB); ++PI) { BasicBlock *pred = *PI; if (!L->contains(pred)) continue; pred->getTerminator()->eraseFromParent(); } BB->eraseFromParent(...

...or I = BB.rbegin(), E = BB.rend(); I != E; ) { Instruction& inst = *I; ++I; <-- iterator should be advanced to the previous instruction // Happens to be an Instruction::SExt. // Works fine if I iterate forwards if (isInstructionTriviallyDead(&inst, TLI)) inst.eraseFromParent(); } Sorry for the inexperienced question, but I'm confused why this works when using a forward iterator, but fails in reverse. The iterator is moved off the current instruction so why would erasing the current instruction cause an error? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML atta...

...Use "CG.removeFunctionFromModule(F);" before deleting it. Nick > Yours sincerely, > Kadysev Mikhail > > 22.04.2012, в 5:20, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > >> Михаил wrote: >>> Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in >>> eraseFromParent(): >>> >>> While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi >>> An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! >>> UNREACHABLE executed at >>> /Users/neonomaly/LLVM/LLVM/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:561! >> >> The replaceAllUsesWith + eraseFr...

...the use of a specified instruction. This is the code I have written Instruction *new_instr = BinaryOperator::Create(Instruction::Sub, op1, op2, ""); b->getInstList().insertAfter(old_instr, new_instr); //b is the BasicBlock old_instr->replaceAllUsesWith(new_instr); old_instr->eraseFromParent(); When I print the basic block, I see that my instruction was inserted and replaces the old instruction, however I get a stack dump, when I run the instrumented IR file. 0 opt 0x00000000014680df llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(_IO_FILE*) + 38 1 opt 0x000000000146835c 2...

Hi, I have two functions in a module, X.foo, which is the callee, and Y.foo2, which calls X.foo. If i either try to run llvm::Function::eraseFromParent() on any one of the functions, i'll get this assertion error: F is used in instruction: %"calling function" = call i32 @X.foo(i32 %read) F is used in instruction: %"calling function" = call i32 @X.foo(i32 %read) While deleting: i32 (i32)* %X.foo Use still stuck around a...

...ing LLVM IRBuilder (trunk version) >> >> Basically I recreate a function over and over again, and pretty sure >> that my code doesn't cause the leak >> while(true) >> { >>  Function *fn = module->getFunction(name); >>    if (fn) >>       fn->eraseFromParent(); > > Err, shouldn't you delete fn here?  I'm pretty sure that this just > removes the function from the module. Doxygen says that: "eraseFromParent - This method unlinks 'this' from the containing module and deletes it." so it should be fine just calling erase...

...ariable by a constant value for erase instruction. i had seen the code that as follows for (llvm::GlobalVariable::use_iterator U = gv->use_begin(); U != gv->use_end();--U ) { llvm::Instruction *I = llvm::cast<llvm::Instruction>(U); I->replaceAllUsesWith(constPtr); I->eraseFromParent(); } but i dont know how can declare constptr. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111005/35b8a0c8/attachment.html>