search for: grodriguez

I am finding some weird behavior in the CallGraph, and am not sure what am I doing wrong. When trying to traverse nodes in the CallGraph I get stuck in nodes representing external functions. Take the following code: ----- #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf( "Hello World!\n" ); } ----- If I try to traverse the CallGraph using the following code: ----- CallGraph CG

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 5:10 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 2/28/11 10:04 AM, Frits van Bommel wrote: >> I don't think a full clone is necessary, since he wants to replace the >> function. He only needs to create the new function and splice in the >> body of the old one. > > That is exactly what MakeFunctionClone() does.  It creates a

Hi In my NT server I have this exported directory: Doc/CAMI?N/example.txt If I mount this with Samba 2.2.2 (Linux RH7.1 with kernel 2.4.10): Doc/CAMI And I can't access the file "example.txt". If I try to copy the directory to another place: cp: cannot access `PRUEBA/CAMI': No such file or directory And in /var/log/message: Oct 25 08:24:17 srvlyx02 kernel:

Hi all, I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In particular, I want to ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. However there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: llvm::Function::getFunctionType() returns a a reference to a const object, while modifying only the argument list yields an error during verification since the

Hi all, I have been trying to build a loop nesting analysis which works interprocedurally. In order to find the functions called inside a given loop, I am traversing the Instructions into the BasicBlock's that conform a Loop, and applying the code that CallGraph construction uses: ------ extract from CallGraph.cpp : 144 // Look for calls by this function. for (Function::iterator BB =

Dear All, As of late I am having a hard time getting my head around how array accesses are translated by Clang into LLVM IR: the often misunderstood GEP instruction. I am trying to reverse-engineer array accesses to discover the number of dimensions and actual indexes of the original, and I am beginning to wonder whether this is possible at all. To illustrate (some of) my troubles, consider