search for: op_iterator

Programmers’ manual says we can iterate over a use-def chain by op_iterator. It works fine except for load and store instruction of stack variables. For example, a simple bitcode is like the below. i = alloca i32 store i32 0, i32* %i, align 4 %tmp1 = load i32* %i, align 4 If I apply a use-def chain to load instruction, I get alloca instruction. I think store i...

...pecified by the pointer values, etc..). Would you suggest having LLVM add code after each instruction to get this, or is there another way to do this? I've tried writing some code, as follows (where i is an inst_iterator, but the results are not what I would have expected: for (User::op_iterator j = i->op_begin(), f = i->op_end(); j != f; + +j) { std::cerr << "Operand: " << (j->getUser())->getOperand(0) << "\n"; } or for (User::op_iterator j = i->op_begin(), f = i->op_end(); j != f; + +j) { std::cerr << "Opera...

...#39;m not sure I'm ready to go > and change everything to CallInst factories given the tons of other things > I've got to work on. Of course :) > The iterator and one-argument constructors appear to cover 99% of the > cases and the two-argument clients can often just pass Use::op_iterators > directly. I've even found one case where we can eliminate a temporary vector. nice! -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

...I found Iterating over def-use & use-def chains <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#iterate_chains>. will this work for finding the places where a variable is reaching? I tried to use "use_iterator", but couldn't make it out. Is it a must to write LLVM Pass to use op_iterator and use_iterator? please give me any references or examples to understand more about use_iterator. Best Regards, Srikanth Vaindam -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120419/a5ee85ed/attachment.h...

... here is some generally useful information I should have cc'd to llvmdev in the first place ... -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:41:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> To: Sean Peisert <peisert at gmail.com> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Getting started with LLVM

I am able to access the source operands of an instruction using either getOperand() or op_iterator, However, I can't find any method available for destination operand. Someone suggests that instruction itself can represent the destination operand. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-January/037518.html The getOperand() returns an unsigned value like 0x9063498, while I can't...

hello guys: I am in trouble with get the identifies of the unnamed temporaries from the instruction of LLVM IR. for example: instruction: %4 = mul nsw i32 %1, %width unnamed temporaries: %4, %1 how to get them? I have tried several iterators(op_iterator,value_op_iterator) and getOperand(int) function,but none of them works. does anyone know how to get it? thanks very much -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/get-the-identifies-of-the-unnamed-temporaries-from-the-instruction-of-LLVM-IR-tp56572.html Sent from the LLV...

...ve got working and checked in. I'm not sure I'm ready to go and change everything to CallInst factories given the tons of other things I've got to work on. The iterator and one-argument constructors appear to cover 99% of the cases and the two-argument clients can often just pass Use::op_iterators directly. I've even found one case where we can eliminate a temporary vector. -Dave

...def-use & > use-def chains<http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#iterate_chains>. > will this work for finding the places where a variable is reaching? > > I tried to use "use_iterator", but couldn't make it out. Is it a must to > write LLVM Pass to use op_iterator and use_iterator? > please give me any references or examples to understand more about > use_iterator. > > > Best Regards, > Srikanth Vaindam > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev...

Hi Nick, I parsed your message again carefully and did some experiments. I guess the: for (User::op_iterator i = I->op_begin(), e = I->op_end(); i != e; ++i) { } iterates over the operands of the instruction "I", which are as you said, *other* instructions. But if I want to get other information about the instruction, say the type of the operands, then I still need to figure out how to...

ivtm wrote: > Hey Oscar, > > I want to extract information from the instruction. > > Think writing a simple interpreter. > > I already have the CallInst instance (described above in the message). > > Via ci->getOperand(1) say I can get the 'i32 8' parameter and I can get the > 'i32' and '8' separately as Nick described. > > But I

Launcher <st.liucheng at gmail.com> writes: > I am able to access the source operands of an instruction using either > getOperand() or op_iterator, However, I can't find any method available for > destination operand. Someone suggests that instruction itself can represent > the destination operand. > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-January/037518.html That's correct: the llvm::Instruction itself represents th...

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, David Greene wrote: >>> We should just keep the existing constructor, so this isn't a problem. >>> These clients don't have the "dereference end" problem. >> >> Duh. >> >> Yep, ok, this sounds good. > > Grr. That's no so easy either, because it conflicts with the one-argument > specialized constructor.

...l has examples of how to iterate over many common structures, such as instructions in a basic block[1]. Other than that, you can check the source code or doxygen[2]. Basically, you loop over the instructions as detailed in the programmer's manual[1], and loop over the operands using User's op_iterators[2] checking to see if they have entries in ValueMap[3]. If they do, you set that operand to use ValueMap's entry. [1] http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#iterate_basicblock [2] http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1User.html [3] http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1ValueMap.html On Th...

...t Type *Ptr, + Value* const *Idx, unsigned NumIdx); + + static const Type *getIndexedType(const Type *Ptr, + uint64_t const *Idx, unsigned NumIdx); + static const Type *getIndexedType(const Type *Ptr, Value *Idx); inline op_iterator idx_begin() { return op_begin()+1; } -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080723/deee3d06/...

...your suggestion, I got some progress. Thanks again. But I am still stuck in some problems. Constant *Cstr = GV->getInitializer(); After that, I tried to use a. for(unsigned i=0;i<Cstr->getNumOperands();++i){ Cstr->getOperand(i); } b. for(User::op_iterator I=Cstr->op_begin(),E=Cstr->op_end(); I!=E;++I){ std::cerr<<*I; } From either a or b, I could get each element of Global Variable. Supposedly, I will use my arithmetic like XOR etc to encode/hide the string. But I cannot use XOR, I mean I tried (*I)^0x33, it...

On Jul 22, 2008, at 11:54 PM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi Chris, > > >> I'd prefer to not turn this into a template. Why not just define a >> version that takes an array of uint64_t's or something like that? > because I want to be able to pass in iterators. I could define a > version that > takes std<uint64_t>::iterators, but next thing we know, we

Sir, I am using the op_begin and op_end iterator for iterating over the operands as mentioned below. for (User::op_iterator operand=j->op_begin(),operand_end=j->op_end();operand!=operand_end;++operand){ Value *v=operand->get(); const Type *t=v->getType(); cerr<<endl<<" operand: "<<"[ "<<v->hasName()<<" ]"<<v->getName()<<" T...

...sInstructionTriviallyDead(I, nullptr)) { // Loop over all of the values that the instruction uses. If there are // instructions being used, add them to the worklist, because they might // go dead after this one is removed. SmallVector<Instruction *, 8> Operands; for (User::op_iterator OI = I->op_begin(), E = I->op_end(); OI != E; ++OI) if (Instruction *Used = dyn_cast<Instruction>(*OI)) Operands.push_back(Used); // Remove the instruction. I->eraseFromParent(); // Only add the operands to the worklist if their uses are now empty, //...

Hello everybody. I'm quite new to LLVM and I'm encontering problems with cloning basic blocks. My two basic blocks are in the same function and it doesn't really matter how the cloned one behave for the moment. Of course, to do so, I used the cloning.h 's method "CloneBasicBlock" but I have the "Instruction does not dominate all uses!" error. I know what it