search for: pcalling

Hi: My llvm code is: for( BasicBlock::iterator i = b->begin() , ie = b->end(); b != be ; b ++ ){ if( CallInst * pCall = dyn_cast<CallInst>(i)){ pCall->dump(); // Function * pFunction = pCall->getCalledFunction(); if( !pFunction ){ } std::string fname = pFunction->getName(); } } The dump result

thanks! After I check the ll file, I find this: %1 = load %struct.nsAString** %aBuf_addr, align 4, !dbg !2048 %2 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsAString* %1, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg !2048 %3 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsISupports* %2, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg !2048 %4 = load i32 (...)*** %3, align 4, !dbg !2048 %5 = getelementptr inbounds i32 (...)** %4, i32 10, !dbg !2048 %6 = load i32 (...)**

> On 1/26/11 2:40 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: >> thanks! >> >> After I check the ll file, I find this: >> >> %1 = load %struct.nsAString** %aBuf_addr, align 4, !dbg !2048 >> %2 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsAString* %1, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg >> !2048 >> %3 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsISupports* %2, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg >> !2048

On 1/26/11 2:07 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: > Hi: > > My llvm code is: > > for( BasicBlock::iterator i = b->begin() , ie = b->end(); > b != be ; b ++ ){ > if( CallInst * pCall = dyn_cast<CallInst>(i)){ > > pCall->dump(); // > Function * pFunction = pCall->getCalledFunction(); > if(

On 1/26/11 2:40 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: > thanks! > > After I check the ll file, I find this: > > %1 = load %struct.nsAString** %aBuf_addr, align 4, !dbg !2048 > %2 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsAString* %1, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg !2048 > %3 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsISupports* %2, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg !2048 > %4 = load i32 (...)*** %3, align 4, !dbg !2048

On 1/26/11 3:00 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: >> On 1/26/11 2:40 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: >>> thanks! >>> >>> After I check the ll file, I find this: >>> >>> %1 = load %struct.nsAString** %aBuf_addr, align 4, !dbg !2048 >>> %2 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsAString* %1, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg >>> !2048 >>> %3

Thanks a lot! I finally fix my problem. My code is like this: //CallInst* pCall pCall is a printf called in my situation if( ConstantExpr * pCE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>( pCall->getArgOperand(0))){ if( GlobalVariable * pGV = dyn_cast<GlobalVariable>( pCE->getOperand(0))){ if( ConstantArray * pCA = dyn_cast<ConstantArray>(

Hi everyone: The code I am analyzing is : int main() { int i = 0; printf("hello world!"); printf( "%d" , i ); } I want to get each place where printf is called, and the argument used during that call. so I write llvm pass code like: void Myfunction( Function & F){ for( Function::iterator b = F.begin() , be = F.end() ;

character arguments with call_R do not work except in the first position. (In other positions, they just yield a single blank character.) The error is at line 1858 of dotcode.c which should be changed from STRING(CAR(pcall))[i]=s; to STRING(CAR(pcall))[0]=s; Jim -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read

Hi, I am encountering a problem that I do not know how to debug. I would greatly appreciate any guidance on this issue. On Windows when I run Lua test cases from JITed code I am getting following error: Unhandled exception at 0x00007FFCEEEAC500 (ntdll.dll) in lua.exe: 0xC0000028: An invalid or unaligned stack was encountered during an unwind operation. This is happening when the Lua code is

> On 1/26/11 3:00 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: >>> On 1/26/11 2:40 PM, songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: >>>> thanks! >>>> >>>> After I check the ll file, I find this: >>>> >>>> %1 = load %struct.nsAString** %aBuf_addr, align 4, !dbg !2048 >>>> %2 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.nsAString* %1, i32 0, i32 0, !dbg

Hi All, We have this piece of code in our system , where we are iteratively remove functions that we scan the cfg and mark as unreachable. We observe that with llvm-2.6 func->eraseFromParent() works but with llvm-2.7 we get a the following assert. An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! UNREACHABLE executed at llvm-2.7/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:522! CODE

Hi All, We have this piece of code in our system , where we are iteratively remove functions that were unreachable in the cfg. In llvm-2.6 func->eraseFromParent() worked but now we want to move to llvm-2.7 we get a the following assert. An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! UNREACHABLE executed at llvm-2.7/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp: 522! CODE

songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: > Hi everyone: > > The code I am analyzing is : > > int main() > { > int i = 0; > printf("hello world!"); > printf( "%d" , i ); > } > > > > I want to get each place where printf is called, and the argument used > during that call. > > so I write llvm

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > I constructed a minimal Lua program that reproduces the problem. > Essentially the problem occurs if a JITed function is recursively > called - and there is a longjmp from the inner call. Example: > > function rais(n) > if n == 0 then error() > else rais(n-1) >

...-------------------------- ^B^@^@��^C^A��^C^A��^C^B��^D^@^@^R^U^W��#^M^@^@^C^@^NThis">llvm^A^@^@^@�^A^@^@0������F^E^@^@^O^P^N^O^C^X^P^P^O^C^U^P^A^P^T^P^C^M^G^B^S^@^P^^@^A^G^P^X^M^G^@^N^G^[^@^M^@^@^P^Z����<85>^B^@^@��^C^A��^C^A��^C^B��^D^@^@^R^U^W��#^M^@^@^C^@^NThis is main function ^@^PCalling sub function^@^PThis is sub ^P^Hb^Q^A^A'>function^@^A^A^@^A^A^G^@^B^C^S^C^Y^A^M^@^G^@^G^C^Y^A^O^@^G^@^G^C^Y^B^O^@^G^@^G������"^@^@^@^@������"^@^@^@^@������^B^Q^@^@^@����^G^F^@^@]^Q^P^@^K<8c>^P^Hb^Q^A^A ^L ^@p^R^B^A^A������p^R^B^A^B������p^R��r^U^A^A^E^G^@^@��^H^@^@^@^A^A^B^G...

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I have trouble using the llvm tools.Some of the errors are : > > $ llvm-dis prog.bc > $ llvm-dis: Invalid Top Level Block Length! Type:1, Size:456 (Vers=0, Pos=12) Can you explain how you generated this bytecode file? It looks corrupted or something. Also, can you send the actual bytecode file itself? Thanks! -Chris >

Here are a few patches I applied to get the Lua bindings to build correctly with different versions of Lua. I am not particularly happy with generating all the test scripts just for the shebang line. Since it has been a while since I had to edit autoconf/automake, this was the best I could come up with. Cheers, -Hilko