search for: getpars

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

Attached 2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may > be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution > tests in LLVM): > > diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp > index daf7742..b10fab2 100644 > ---

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

Hello, I'm finding problems with BackEdgeTaken count calculation in even simple fortran loops with gfortran-4.6 + DragonEgg 3.0. Even for simple double loops like this one: program test2 integer i,j,k dimension k(100,100) do j=1,100 do i=1,100 k(i,j) = i enddo enddo write(*,*) k(1,30) end make the ScalarEvolution

Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution tests in LLVM): diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp index daf7742..b10fab2 100644 --- a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp +++ b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp @@ -4293,9 +4293,15 @@

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

Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion. Thanks! Marcello 2012/2/9 Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com>: > Your patch should include a testcase,

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.

Your patch should include a testcase, see test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution for examples. "BranchInst* " should be "BranchInst *". You should have spaces after the // in your comments. One of the comment lines isn't indented properly. Nick On 8 February 2012 12:05, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote: > Attached > > 2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni

On May 29, 2009, at 11:37 PM, Rotem Varon wrote: > How can i know, if a value have uses outside of the current basic > block (liveout), without iterating 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

This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what you are saying. This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block doesn't have a unique predecessor, but because the unique predecessor (the inner loop block) has a successor that is inside the loop (in this case itself, because it's the inner loop block). That doesn't change, anyway, the assuption that

On Wed, 11 May 2005, Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 13:17 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Wed, 11 May 2005, Vladimir Prus wrote: >>> 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

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>

On 8 February 2012 15:50, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote: > Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more > as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid > solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up > the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion. > I'm

> 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

This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the problem (attached) Also a more conforming patch has been attached 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what > you are saying. > This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block > doesn't have a unique predecessor,

FInally I had the time to complete everything up. Now I included the test case in the patch and the testcase runs with the LLVM tests system. 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the > problem (attached) > Also a more conforming patch has been attached > > 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms

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