search for: getpar

I've got a PhD student starting this year. She'll be working on data mining. She has asked for a reading list while she's still in her home country, which is a really good sign. Her cosupervisor and I don't (think we) have any problem with choosing things that are specifically about data mining, but there are some statistical ideas (sampling, exploratory-vs-confirmatory,

I’m debugging SAFECode source code files, and in AllocatorInfo.cpp, in the function getObjectSize(Value* V), the function getAnalysis<DataLayout>() is called. I’ve run into this problem before, and the first time I saw it, my employer recommended I use M.getDataLayout() instead, where M was a reference to a Module. However, in getObjectSize(Value* V), there is no Module reference in the

I'm trying to clone a MachineInstr in the AsmPrinter::EmitInstruction, Here is the code: void EsenciaAsmPrinter::EmitInstruction(const MachineInstr *MI) { const MachineFunction *MF = MI->getParent()->getParent(); MachineInstr *CloneMI = MF->CloneMachineInstr(MI); ... ... } The problem is that MF is a const and CloneMachineInstr expects a non-const. Does anybody know if there is a way to create a copy of a given MachineInstr? Any help is appreciated. -- Rail Shafigulin Software...

...nt of the > branch will > @@ -4316,10 +4322,23 @@ ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { >   if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && >       ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && >       ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { > -    // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor chain > -    // up to the header. > + >     bool Ok = false; > -    for (BasicBlock *BB = ExitBr->getParent(); BB; ) { > +    //Check if the one of the successor of the exit bra...

Hi Victor, this code from the verifier broke the Ada front-end build: const Module* M = CI.getParent()->getParent()->getParent(); Constant *MallocFunc = M->getFunction("malloc"); if (CI.getOperand(0) == MallocFunc) { const PointerType *PTy = PointerType::getUnqual(Type::getInt8Ty(CI.getParent()->getContext())); Assert1(CI.getType() == PTy, "Malloc c...

...ditional, it can't be in loop!"); @@ -4315,8 +4320,12 @@ ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { // if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && - ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { - // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor chain + ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader() && + !((BrFirstSucc && BrFirstSucc->isUnconditional() && + BrFirstSucc->getSuccessor(0) == L->get...

...not, then the execution count of the branch will @@ -4316,10 +4322,23 @@ ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { - // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor chain - // up to the header. + bool Ok = false; - for (BasicBlock *BB = ExitBr->getParent(); BB; ) { + //Check if the one of the successor of the exit branch has the is a block + /...

Say I want to find all LLVM Value*-es that a live on exit from a basic block. What's the best way? - The 'LiveRange', 'LiveVariables' and 'LiveIntervals' classes seem to be tied to register allocation. - The ./lib/Target/SparcV9/LiveVar/FunctionLiveVarInfo.h file seem to provide what I need, but it's no a public header. - Volodya

...4316,10 +4322,23 @@ ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop >> > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { >> >   if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && >> >       ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && >> >       ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { >> > -    // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor >> > chain >> > -    // up to the header. >> > + >> >     bool Ok = false; >> > -    for (BasicBlock *BB = ExitBr->getParent(); BB; ) { &g...

How does one move instructions from one basic block to another? I tried this: (IB is an Instruction* as is current_last, current_BB is a BasicBlock*) IB->getParent()->getInstList().remove(IB); current_BB->getInstList().insert(current_last, IB); and I get this assertion: Assertion `V->getParent() == 0 && "Value already in a container!!"' failed. it seems to me that remove should remove it from it's container....

...l > > @@ -4316,10 +4322,23 @@ ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop > > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { > > if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && > > ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && > > ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { > > - // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor > chain > > - // up to the header. > > + > > bool Ok = false; > > - for (BasicBlock *BB = ExitBr->getParent(); BB; ) { > > + //Check if the o...

...through all the basic block ? If the value is created within the basic block in question, and the block doesn't loop to itself, then you can just iterate through the uses and note if the use is an instruction in a different block: bool isLiveOut(Instruction* I) { BasicBlock* I_BB = I->getParent(): for (Value::use_iterator ui = I->use_begin(), ue = I->use_end(); ui ! = ue; ++ui) if (cast<Instruction>(ui)->getParent() != I_BB) return true; } } If the value is created within the block but the block loops to itself, you can get away with a very slight adjustment:...

...:ComputeExitLimit(const Loop >> >> > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { >> >> >   if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && >> >> >       ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && >> >> >       ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { >> >> > -    // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor >> >> > chain >> >> > -    // up to the header. >> >> > + >> >> >     bool Ok = false; >> >> > -    fo...

...a public header. >> >> This is overkill. I would suggest something like this: >> >> bool LiveOutsideOfBlock(Instruction *I) { >> for (Value::use_iterator UI = I->use_begin(), E = I->use_end(); UI != E; ++UI) >> if (cast<Instruction>(*UI))->getParent() != I->getParent()) return true; >> return false; >> } > > Is this really going to work? What if the value is used in a loop and it > is used by a phi-node in the same block it is defined? Good point. :) If PHI nodes matter (depends on your application), it would t...

Hi, How can i know, if a value have uses outside of the current basic block (liveout), without iterating through all the basic block ? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090530/71681bc2/attachment.html>

...ScalarEvolution::ComputeExitLimit(const Loop > >> > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { > >> > if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && > >> > ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && > >> > ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { > >> > - // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor > >> > chain > >> > - // up to the header. > >> > + > >> > bool Ok = false; > >> > - for (BasicBlock *BB = Exit...

> Compiling InstrSelectorEmitter.cpp > InstrSelectorEmitter.cpp: In member function `virtual void > llvm::InstrSelectorEmitter::run(std::ostream&)': > InstrSelectorEmitter.cpp:1295: internal compiler error: in > convert_from_eh_region_ranges_1, at except.c:1159 > Please submit a full bug report, GCC 3.3.2 is not compatible with LLVM, sorry! -Chris > with

...t(const Loop >>> >> > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { >>> >> >   if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && >>> >> >       ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && >>> >> >       ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { >>> >> > -    // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor >>> >> > chain >>> >> > -    // up to the header. >>> >> > + >>> >> >     bool Ok = false; >>&g...

...;>>> >> > *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock) { >>>> >> >   if (ExitBr->getSuccessor(0) != L->getHeader() && >>>> >> >       ExitBr->getSuccessor(1) != L->getHeader() && >>>> >> >       ExitBr->getParent() != L->getHeader()) { >>>> >> > -    // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor >>>> >> > chain >>>> >> > -    // up to the header. >>>> >> > + >>>> >> >     bool Ok...

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I created a new block and inserted it into the present basic block list > , but I get this error: > > opt: BasicBlock.cpp:83: virtual llvm::BasicBlock::~BasicBlock(): Assertion `getParent() == 0 && "BasicBlock still linked into the program!"' failed. > > The program completes its task and i get this in the end. I am unable to > resolve this. The problem there is that you're trying to delete some basic block that is still embedded into a funct...