search for: findliveinmbb

Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "findliveinmbb".

Did you mean: findliveinmbbs
2008 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervalAnalysis?
Hi I'm seeing something probably related to this. I'm getting an assert from the lower_bound in LiveIntervals::findLiveinMBBs (from a checking std:: VS2005 implementation). Idx2MBBMap has two elements in it, both of which have a .first of 0. (I believe because of an empty MBB in the function below, so StartIndex doesn't advance). scott On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 2:52 AM, Roman Levenstein <romixlev at yahoo.com>...
2008 Apr 18
1
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervalAnalysis?
...bug so I don't forget? I'm a little occupied right now. But I'll take care of this soon. Evan On Apr 16, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Scott Graham wrote: > Hi > > I'm seeing something probably related to this. I'm getting an assert > from the lower_bound in LiveIntervals::findLiveinMBBs (from a checking > std:: VS2005 implementation). Idx2MBBMap has two elements in it, both > of which have a .first of 0. (I believe because of an empty MBB in the > function below, so StartIndex doesn't advance). > > scott > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 2:52 AM, Roman Levenste...
2009 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
...if (!Reg) continue; // Ignore splited live intervals. if (!isPhys && vrm_->getPreSplitReg(cur.reg)) continue; for (LiveInterval::Ranges::const_iterator I = cur.begin(), E = cur.end(); I != E; ++I) { const LiveRange &LR = *I; if (li_->findLiveInMBBs(LR.start, LR.end, LiveInMBBs)) { for (unsigned i = 0, e = LiveInMBBs.size(); i != e; ++i) if (LiveInMBBs[i] != EntryMBB) LiveInMBBs[i]->addLiveIn(Reg); LiveInMBBs.clear(); } } } If it is the case, it is OK. It was not clear for me that one has...
2008 Apr 16
3
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervalAnalysis?
Hi, In the LiveIntervalAnalysis::runOnMachineFunction, there is a code to compute the MBB2IdxMap, by remembering for each MBB its start and end instruction numbers: unsigned MIIndex = 0; for (MachineFunction::iterator MBB = mf_->begin(), E = mf_->end(); MBB != E; ++MBB) { unsigned StartIdx = MIIndex; for (MachineBasicBlock::iterator I = MBB->begin(), E =
2009 Jan 13
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
On Jan 13, 2009, at 12:27 AM, Roman Levenstein <romix.llvm at googlemail.com > wrote: > 2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com>: >> >> On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote: >> >>> bb368: 0x8fdad00, LLVM BB @0x8fc2c98, ID#1: >>> Predecessors according to CFG: 0x8fdac90 (#0) >>> %R0<def> = MOVi 0, 14, %reg0,
2009 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com>: > > On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote: > >> bb368: 0x8fdad00, LLVM BB @0x8fc2c98, ID#1: >> Predecessors according to CFG: 0x8fdac90 (#0) >> %R0<def> = MOVi 0, 14, %reg0, %reg0 >> *** STR %LR<kill>, %R0<kill>, %reg0, 0, 14, %reg0, Mem:ST(4,4) >> [0x8fc2d68 + 0]