search for: succ_iterators

Hi, As part of an ongoing work to extend the GraphDiff (this models a CFG view), I came across the need to have a common interface for accessing successors/predecessors in various IR units, such that a type such as `typename NodeT::succ_iterator` could be used in templated code. In particular, the need arose for BasicBlocks, MachineBasicBlocks, VPBlockBase and clang::CFGBlock. The least invasive

Hi Dave, It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is no succ_begin for Machine BasicBlock. I'm looking to make the CFGSuccessors and CFGPredecessors classes in CFGDiff.h templated, and this needs a common API for all types instantiations. Does this clarify your question or did I misunderstand

Hello, I try to make a big CFG (control flow graph) by combining all the CFG-s from all the functions of a module. I still have one problem : I want to get the links between functions. For CFG-s, I used CallGraphNode->second->getFunction, then Function_iterators and succ_iterators, so I have all the links between BBs. Now, the questions is how do I link BBs from different functions? I can do it in a way not so elegant. Take the last BB of every function, then getTerminator and see that function it is called and then link to (instruction-2-instruction). There must be there...

...aph) by combining all the CFG-s >> from all >> the functions of a module. I still have one problem : I want to get the >> links >> between functions. >> >> For CFG-s, I used CallGraphNode->second->**getFunction, then >> Function_iterators >> and succ_iterators, so I have all the links between BBs. Now, the >> questions is >> how do I link BBs from different functions? >> >> I can do it in a way not so elegant. Take the last BB of every function, >> then >> getTerminator and see that function it is called and then link...

Hi, this is a bit of a newbie question: I am trying to discover, given a block with a conditional and its successors, which condition (T/F) each successor applies to. There's almost identical code in CFGPrinter.cpp, but where it gets called in GraphWriter.h, the child_iterator type is a pretty hairy thing, so I still don't quite understand how to get one from a BasicBlock in my own

...gt; > I try to make a big CFG (control flow graph) by combining all the CFG-s from all > the functions of a module. I still have one problem : I want to get the links > between functions. > > For CFG-s, I used CallGraphNode->second->getFunction, then Function_iterators > and succ_iterators, so I have all the links between BBs. Now, the questions is > how do I link BBs from different functions? > > I can do it in a way not so elegant. Take the last BB of every function, then > getTerminator and see that function it is called and then link to > (instruction-2-instruction...

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:30 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:31 AM Alina Sbirlea <alina.sbirlea at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Dave, >> >> It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was >> looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is >> no

...e CFG-s > from all > the functions of a module. I still have one problem : I want to get the > links > between functions. > > For CFG-s, I used CallGraphNode->second->__getFunction, then > Function_iterators > and succ_iterators, so I have all the links between BBs. Now, the > questions is > how do I link BBs from different functions? > > I can do it in a way not so elegant. Take the last BB of every function, > then > getTerminator and see that function it is calle...

I have a new plan for handling 'unwinds to' in the control flow graph and dominance. Just as a quick recap the problem I encountered is how to deal instructions in a block being used as operands in the unwind dest. Such as this: bb1: unwinds to %cleanup call void @foo() ; might throw, might not %x = add i32 %y, %z call void @foo() ; might throw, might not ret void cleanup:

I have a MachineFunctionPass plugged into llc during LLVMTargetMachine::addPreRegAlloc. In this Pass I need to extend calls (i. e. CALL32m, CALL32r) iff they call function within the program. CALL32m has, I think, ten different possibilities for the four operands giving the target address. At the moment I have excluded calls that give the displacement as GlobalAddress or JumpTableIndex

Hello, I would like to extract Control Flow Graph and Data Flow Graph from a sample program written in C++, Can anybody please direct me to some examples? Thanks in advance -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20101012/fc071e63/attachment.html>

Sorry -- Small change. Nick Lewycky wrote: > A. redefine the CFG a bit. > i. pred_iterator stays the same. pred_iterator becomes an inverse of outedge_iterator. That is, edges that lead to the execution of this block, regardless of whether it's an unwind-edge or not. Nick

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Reid Spencer wrote: > Newbie Question .. (sorry if its redundant/silly) .. No worries, this is good stuff to have archived on the list! > As I've started to develop Stacker, I had assumed that simply adding > BasicBlocks to a function in sequence would imply that there is an > implicit unconditional branch from the end of one basic block to the > start

We are developing a new backend for a custom processor using LLVM. After updating to LLVM 3.2, we run into an assertion in BlockFrequencyImpl.h. The offending test-case looks basically like this: for ( ... ) { switch (i) { case 100: // do something break; case 102: // do something else break; case 103: // do some more break; case 104: // now something different

> On 25 May 2018, at 01:46, Aaron via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > LLVM optimization pass gives an error "Terminator found in the middle of a basic block!" since basic block IR may have multiple "ret" instructions. It seems LLVM does not accept multiple return in a basic block by default. > Yes, if you’re inserting

> If you don't want critical edges in the machine code CFG, you're going to > have to write a machine code CFG critical edge splitting pass: LLVM > doesn't currently have one. > > -Chris Hey guys, I've coded a pass to break the critical edges of the machine control flow graph. The program works fine, but I am sure it is not the right way of implementing it.

Hi all, LLVM optimization pass gives an error "Terminator found in the middle of a basic block!" since basic block IR may have multiple "ret" instructions. It seems LLVM does not accept multiple return in a basic block by default. Is there a specific optimization or pass that I can enable to remove unreachable codes in basic blocks? Best, Aaron -------------- next part

On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > However, it does not remove all the critical edges. I am getting a very > weird dataflow graph (even without the Break Critical edges pass). The > dataflow generated by MachineFunction::dump() for the program below is > given here: > http://compilers.cs.ucla.edu/fernando/projects/soc/images/loop_no_crit2.pdf ... > The

Newbie Question .. (sorry if its redundant/silly) .. As I've started to develop Stacker, I had assumed that simply adding BasicBlocks to a function in sequence would imply that there is an implicit unconditional branch from the end of one basic block to the start of the next block. Based on the assertion checks that I get when I tried this, I assume that it is required to place a terminating

Hi Dean, Thanks for your reply. That's exactly what I am doing, but I was looking for a default optimization or pass implementation if there was. I used BasicBlock::splitBasicBlock() but it puts "br" end of original basic block. I tried to delete the br instruction by using eraseFromParent() but it didn't work. I had to rewrite my own splitBasicBlock() by modifying the