search for: nofolders

Displaying 18 results from an estimated 18 matches for "nofolders".

Did you mean: nofolder
2009 Nov 20
1
[LLVMdev] NoFolder class problem
Hi all, while I was playing a little bit with IRBuilder I ended up with something like this when included NoFolder.h /work/llvm/include/llvm/User.h: In member function ‘llvm::Value* llvm::NoFolder::CreateExtractElement(llvm::Constant*, llvm::Constant*) const’: /work/llvm/include/llvm/User.h:48: error: ‘static void* llvm::User::operator new(size_t)’ is private
2010 Nov 17
2
[LLVMdev] Missing :CreateFNeg() in NoFolder.h
Hi, Just to report that when I tried to compile some code with a NoFolder given as template arg to my IRBuilder, the compiler complained with: In file included from lang_3-llvm.cxx:33: /usr/lib/llvm-2.8/include/llvm/Support/IRBuilder.h: In member function ‘llvm::Value* llvm::IRBuilder<preserveNames, T, Inserter>::CreateFNeg (llvm::Value*, const llvm::Twine&) [with bool preserveNames =
2010 Nov 17
0
[LLVMdev] Missing :CreateFNeg() in NoFolder.h
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:26 PM, BernardH <gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel at bernard-hugueney.org> wrote: > Should I consider NoFolder unsupported ? Seeing as it's completely broken (it doesn't insert the created instructions into the relevant basic block) that's probably best... :( (It's also missing most of the casting operations, by the way)
2010 Nov 17
1
[LLVMdev] Missing :CreateFNeg() in NoFolder.h
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Frits van Bommel <fvbommel at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:26 PM, BernardH > <gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel at bernard-hugueney.org> wrote: >> Should I consider NoFolder unsupported ? > > Seeing as it's completely broken (it doesn't insert the created > instructions into the relevant basic block)
2013 Nov 28
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling optimizations when using llvm::createPrintModulePass
IRBuilder is a templated class, and one of the template arguments is the constant folder to use. By default it uses the ConstantFolder class which does target-independant constant folding. If you want to disable constant folding you can specify the NoFolder class instead, i.e. declare the builder as follows: IRBuilder<true, llvm::NoFolder> builder(body) On 26 Nov 2013, at 19:23, Daniel
2013 Nov 26
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling optimizations when using llvm::createPrintModulePass
Hello, using the LLVM API, I've build one very simple function that adds two ConstantInts and returns the result. I noticed that, when I emit IR code, it is optimized to a simple "ret i16 42" when I add 40 and 2. I'd like to see the operations that are necessary to compute the result, though. Can I somehow disable this optimization in the pass, leading to more verbose IR code?
2018 Aug 07
2
Create an Add Instruction in LLVM IR
I want to create an add instruction that takes two constant operands at the LLVM IR level. I use the IRBuilder class, but nothing happens. Here is part of the runOnFunction() method of my function pass: ... LLVMContext &Context = F.getContext(); IRBuilder<> builder(&Instruction); Value *Lef = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt32Ty(Context), 4); Value *Rig =
2018 Aug 08
2
Error Calling eraseFromParent()
Hi. Thanks. I changed the code but the problem exists. This is my new code which is again very simple: ... bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override { vector<Instruction *> dels; dels.clear(); for (inst_iterator It = inst_begin(&F), Ie = inst_end(&F); It != Ie;) { Instruction *I = &*(It++); if (auto* op = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(I)) { IRBuilder<NoFolder>
2018 Aug 08
3
Error Calling eraseFromParent()
LLVM is built in Release mode. The version is 6.0.0. I think that a similar code worked on verison 3.9.0. It is probably a null pointer dereference occurring in eraseFromParent(). I checked and reconfirmed that the instruction had no uses. Perhaps I should rebuild LLVM. Thanks. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 9:03 PM, mayuyu.io <admin at mayuyu.io> wrote: > Hmmmm that’s strange. Do you get an
2010 Mar 23
0
[LLVMdev] How to avoid memory leaks
Are you calling llvm_shutdown() at the end of your program? You should. valgrind reports "possible" leaks when it finds a pointer pointing inside a memory block (as opposed to at the first byte), and LLVM uses those a lot. llvm_shutdown() will free a lot of that memory, including the LLVMContext, which should remove any false leaks you might be seeing. On the other hand, the
2012 Nov 02
0
[LLVMdev] Instruction does not dominate all uses! <badref> ??
Hi edA-qa mort-ora-y, On 02/11/12 10:20, edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: > I'm having trouble figuring out what the error "Instruction does not > dominate all uses!" means. I'm trying to construct a call to a function > with two parameters. The printed IR, with error, looks like this: > > define i32 @add(i32, i32) { > EntryBlock: > %2 = add i32 %0, %1 >
2012 Nov 02
4
[LLVMdev] Instruction does not dominate all uses! <badref> ??
I'm having trouble figuring out what the error "Instruction does not dominate all uses!" means. I'm trying to construct a call to a function with two parameters. The printed IR, with error, looks like this: define i32 @add(i32, i32) { EntryBlock: %2 = add i32 %0, %1 ret i32 %2 } define i32 @eval_expr() { EntryBlock: ret i32 <badref> } Instruction does not dominate
2018 Aug 07
2
Error Calling eraseFromParent()
Thanks Bjorn! But The problem is still there. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 2:04 AM, Björn Pettersson A < bjorn.a.pettersson at ericsson.com> wrote: > It looks quite dangerous to erase the instruction I inside the loop when > iterating over all instructions in the function. > I guess it depends on how the range based iterator is implemented if that > works or not. > > I think
2013 Oct 15
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] r192750 - Enable MI Sched for x86.
I should mention a couple of useful self-explanatory LLVM flags for triage: -enable-misched=false -verify-misched -Andy On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:43 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > Grats on the work, a long time coming! > > Beware the incoming register allocation bugs ;) > > -eric > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at
2010 Oct 01
2
[LLVMdev] CMake "sudo make install" & headers
Sorry for the rapid fire replies, but this configuration works for me: install(DIRECTORY include/ DESTINATION include # FILES_MATCHING PATTERN "*.def" PATTERN "*.h" PATTERN "*.td" PATTERN "*.inc" PATTERN ".svn" EXCLUDE ) install(DIRECTORY ${CMAKE_CURRENT_BINARY_DIR}/include/ DESTINATION include # FILES_MATCHING PATTERN
2010 Oct 01
0
[LLVMdev] CMake "sudo make install" & headers
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Samuel Williams <space.ship.traveller at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I might just be doing something stupid, but when I do > > $ cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/llvm-2.8 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release .. > $ sudo make install > > I don't get the expected headers in >        /usr/local/llvm-2.8/include/llvm > > It is
2010 Sep 30
6
[LLVMdev] CMake "sudo make install" & headers
Hi, I might just be doing something stupid, but when I do $ cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/llvm-2.8 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release .. $ sudo make install I don't get the expected headers in /usr/local/llvm-2.8/include/llvm It is simply an empty directory. What am I doing wrong? This is on Mac OS X, CMake 2.8+ Kind regards, Samuel
2010 Mar 23
2
[LLVMdev] How to avoid memory leaks
Hi Jeffrey, Listed below the Full valgrind report (using latest revision r99309) The program creates many thousands of instructions and values as you can see from the report below ==20504== Memcheck, a memory error detector ==20504== Copyright (C) 2002-2009, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==20504== Using Valgrind-3.5.0-Debian and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info ==20504==