search for: rhsarg

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "rhsarg".

Did you mean: lhsarg
2013 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] no-alias generated as result of restrict function arguments
...identified object (alloca or noalias call) can't equal any - // incoming argument, unless they're both null or they belong to - // different functions. The latter happens during inlining. - if (Instruction *LHSInst = dyn_cast<Instruction>(LHSPtr)) - if (Argument *RHSArg = dyn_cast<Argument>(RHSPtr)) - if (LHSInst->getParent()->getParent() == RHSArg->getParent() && - Pred == CmpInst::ICMP_EQ) - return ConstantInt::get(ITy, false); + case ICmpInst::ICMP_NE: + return ConstantInt::get(ITy, true); +...
2013 Jan 16
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] no-alias generated as result of restrict function arguments
...identified object (alloca or noalias call) can't equal any - // incoming argument, unless they're both null or they belong to - // different functions. The latter happens during inlining. - if (Instruction *LHSInst = dyn_cast<Instruction>(LHSPtr)) - if (Argument *RHSArg = dyn_cast<Argument>(RHSPtr)) - if (LHSInst->getParent()->getParent() == RHSArg->getParent() && - Pred == CmpInst::ICMP_EQ) - return ConstantInt::get(ITy, false); - } + bool lhs_noaliasarg = false; + bool rhs_noaliasarg = false; +...
2012 Dec 12
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] no-alias generated as result of restrict function arguments
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
2012 Dec 12
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] no-alias generated as result of restrict function arguments
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