search for: icmp_eq

...- if (llvm::isKnownNonNull(LHSPtr) || llvm::isKnownNonNull(RHSPtr)) { - // If both sides are different identified objects, they aren't equal - // unless they're null. - if (LHSPtr != RHSPtr && llvm::isIdentifiedObject(RHSPtr) && - Pred == CmpInst::ICMP_EQ) + // icmp <object*>, <object*/null> + if (LHS->getType()->isPointerTy() && RHS->getType()->isPointerTy()) { + // Ignore pointer casts, they are irrevelant for (in)equality tests. + Value *LHSPtr = LHS->stripPointerCasts(); + Value *RHSPtr = RHS->str...

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:01:01AM -0800, Dan Gohman wrote: >> > Is that >> > assumption violated if I explicitly cast away const and pass the result >> > to a function with NoAlias argument? >> >> Not immediately, no. It means that you can't access the

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:01:01AM -0800, Dan Gohman wrote: > > Is that > > assumption violated if I explicitly cast away const and pass the result > > to a function with NoAlias argument? > > Not immediately, no. It means that you can't access the constant > pointer's pointee directly within the noalias argument's scope. Access > to that object must go

...interCasts(); + if (LHSPtr == RHSPtr) + return ConstantInt::get(ITy, CmpInst::isTrueWhenEqual(Predicate)); + if (isa<ConstantPointerNull>(RHSPtr) && isKnownNonNull(LHSPtr)) { + if (ICmpInst::isEquality(Pred)) + return ConstantInt::get(ITy, Predicate != ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ); + } + if (ICmpInst::isEquality(Pred)) { + // RHS is not a null pointer and the objects are different. + // Remove inbound GEPs and determine the object types. + LHSPtr = LHSPtr->stripInBoundsOffsets(); + RHSPtr = RHSPtr->stripInBoundsOffsets(); + // For alloca...

Hello, In one of the loop transformations I am developing, I need to convert eq and neq loop latch condition into less than or greater than depending on the control flow. The problem is that CmpInst::ICMP_EQ and CmpInst::ICMP_NE are neither signed nor unsigned in LLVM. Also, I did not find a way to find out if the integer operands of the CmpInst are signed or unsigned. Apparently, LLVM does not distinguish in its type system between signed and unsigned variables. So, I am not able to generate the appro...

...f unordered, less than, or equal + FCMP_UNE = 14, ///< 1 1 1 0 True if unordered or not equal + FCMP_TRUE = 15, ///< 1 1 1 1 Always true (always folded) FIRST_FCMP_PREDICATE = FCMP_FALSE, LAST_FCMP_PREDICATE = FCMP_TRUE, BAD_FCMP_PREDICATE = FCMP_TRUE + 1, - ICMP_EQ = 32, /// equal - ICMP_NE = 33, /// not equal - ICMP_UGT = 34, /// unsigned greater than - ICMP_UGE = 35, /// unsigned greater or equal - ICMP_ULT = 36, /// unsigned less than - ICMP_ULE = 37, /// unsigned less or equal - ICMP_SGT = 38, /// signed greater th...

...turn value of a call instruction with 0. The called function's return type is uint32. The return value is 1 or 0. But the icmp instruction cannot be created. CallInst *ret = CallInst::Create(ptr_func, params.begin(), params.end(), "", bb); Value *cmp = new ICmpInst(*bb, ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ, ret, ,ConstantInt::get(getIntegerType(32), 0) "") The runtime error is: /usr/local/include/llvm/Instructions.h:690: llvm::ICmpInst::ICmpInst(llvm::BasicBlock&, llvm::CmpInst::Predicate, llvm::Value*, llvm::Value*, const llvm::Twine&): Assertion `getOperand(0)->getType() == ge...

...ining a "=", such as: void scop_func(long A[], long n) { long i; for (i = 1; i<= n; i++) A[i] = 1; } after have a look at the code that computing the back-edge taken count, i found that ScalarEvolution could only compute back-edge taken count if the exit condition is ICMP_NE/ICMP_EQ/ICMP_SLT/ICMP_SGT/ICMP_ULT/ICMP_UGT (ignoring "ComputeBackedgeTakenCountExhaustively"), and the function "SimplifyICmpOperands" will try to convert other conditions to the conditions listed above, by doing something like "i <= n" to "i < n+1", but it re...

...are identical sub-expressions to the left and to the right of the '&&' operator: CurChar != '\n' && CurChar != '\n'. The second expression should probably be CurChar != '\n'? ---- lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineAndOrXor.cpp:505     result |= (icmp_eq ? (FoldMskICmp_Mask_AllZeroes |                           FoldMskICmp_Mask_AllZeroes |                           FoldMskICmp_AMask_Mixed |                           FoldMskICmp_BMask_Mixed)                        : (FoldMskICmp_Mask_NotAllZeroes |                           FoldMskICmp_Mask_NotAllZe...

...id scop_func(long A[], long n) { > long i; > > for (i = 1; i<= n; i++) > A[i] = 1; > } > > after have a look at the code that computing the back-edge taken count, i found that ScalarEvolution could only compute back-edge taken count if the exit condition is ICMP_NE/ICMP_EQ/ICMP_SLT/ICMP_SGT/ICMP_ULT/ICMP_UGT (ignoring "ComputeBackedgeTakenCountExhaustively"), and the function "SimplifyICmpOperands" will try to convert other conditions to the conditions listed above, by doing something like "i <= n" to "i < n+1", but it re...

%0 = icmp eq i32 %y, 0 In the above instruction how can i know that the comparison is equality comparison?? --Rajwinder Singh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100628/8d8e5cb1/attachment.html>

...erand(1); + + ConstantInt *Con; + if (!((Con = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(LHS)) || (Con = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(RHS)))) + return nullptr; + uint64_t con_val = Con->getZExtValue(); + + if (RHS == CI) + IC->swapOperands(); + + switch (IC->getPredicate()) { + case ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_NE: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_UGT: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE: + case ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE: + // XXX: check for wrapping + if (con_val == UINT64_MAX) + return nullptr; + return emit...

...> operator: CurChar != '\n'&& CurChar != '\n'. The second expression should > probably be CurChar != '\n'? Chris also added this code, hopefully he will comment. > > ---- > lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineAndOrXor.cpp:505 > result |= (icmp_eq ? (FoldMskICmp_Mask_AllZeroes | > FoldMskICmp_Mask_AllZeroes | > FoldMskICmp_AMask_Mixed | > FoldMskICmp_BMask_Mixed) > : (FoldMskICmp_Mask_NotAllZeroes | >...

...en get a dump() on it. Does anyone see what I am doing wrong? BasicBlock *bb = i->getParent(); Instruction *j = bb->end(); BasicBlock *bb_after = i->getParent()->splitBasicBlock(&*i); bb->getTerminator()->eraseFromParent(); ICmpInst *test = new ICmpInst(j, CmpInst::ICMP_EQ, shadow, val, "Shadow check"); BasicBlock *trueBlock = BasicBlock::Create(M.getContext(), "Shadow Check Block: TRUE", &F); CallInst::Create(qv_true, "", trueBlock); BranchInst::Create(bb_after, trueBlock); BasicBlock *falseBlock = BasicBlock::Create(M...

Sure On Mon, Jul 4, 2016, 9:40 AM Carlos Liam <carlos at aarzee.me> wrote: > It looks like there's already something similar in PropagateEquality which > eg X >= Y == true and replaces X < Y == false, which is somewhat similar - > could I base an addition off of that? > > > - CL > > On Jul 3, 2016, at 7:13 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>

...terType>(Addr->getType()); llvm::Type * ElTy = PTy -> getElementType(); if (!ElTy->isPointerTy()) { llvm::BasicBlock *OldBB = SI.getParent(); llvm::errs() << "yes, got it \n"; llvm::ICmpInst *Cmp = new llvm::ICmpInst(&SI, llvm::CmpInst::ICMP_EQ, Addr, llvm::Constant::getNullValue(Addr->getType()), ""); llvm::Instruction *Iter = &SI; OldBB->getParent()->dump(); llvm::BasicBlock *NewBB = OldBB->splitBasicBlock(Iter, "newBlock"); OldBB->getParent()->dump(); } }...

...; > llvm::Type * ElTy = PTy -> getElementType(); > if (!ElTy->isPointerTy()) { > llvm::BasicBlock *OldBB = SI.getParent(); > llvm::errs()<< "yes, got it \n"; > llvm::ICmpInst *Cmp = new llvm::ICmpInst(&SI, llvm::CmpInst::ICMP_EQ, Addr, llvm::Constant::getNullValue(Addr->getType()),""); > > llvm::Instruction *Iter =&SI; > OldBB->getParent()->dump(); > llvm::BasicBlock *NewBB = OldBB->splitBasicBlock(Iter,"newBlock"); > OldBB->getParent()-&...