search for: test_func

...se in advance for this question; I'm sure it is answered in the documentation or this mailing list many times, however the answer has eluded me. I'm trying to write a function where I don't want external variables to be scoped in from the parent environment. Given this function: test_func = function() { if (exists("kat") == FALSE) { print("kat is undefined") } else { print(kat) } } If I did this: > kat = 12 > test_func() I'd like the result to be the error, but now it's 12 (which is of course correct according to the documentation)....

...uleID = 'test_load_lib.c' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-f80:128:128-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32-S32" target triple = "i686-pc-mingw32" declare i32 @a_outside_func(i32) define i32 @test_func() { entry: %call = call i32 @a_outside_func(i32 15) ret i32 %call } where a_outside_func is a function defined on my code: extern "C" int a_outside_func(int a) { return a + 50; } and following code is to get MCJIT work: #define prt(x) if(x) { cout << x << endl; } LLV...

...ckaddress(@test_fun, %test_label) > } > > define i32 @test_fun() nounwind { > entry: > ret i32 -1 > test_label: > br label %ret > ret: > ret i32 -1 > } > > The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. I'm not sure I understand completely. We should be able to rely on the indirectbr label arguments to identify blocks that are live. You c...

...> "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-f80:128:128-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32-S32" > > target triple = "i686-pc-mingw32" > > > > declare i32 @a_outside_func(i32) > > > > define i32 @test_func() { > > entry: > > %call = call i32 @a_outside_func(i32 15) > > ret i32 %call > > } > > > > where a_outside_func is a function defined on my code: > > > > extern "C" int a_outside_func(int a) > > { > > return a + 50; > &...

...;> >> define i32 @test_fun() nounwind { >> entry: >> ret i32 -1 >> test_label: >> br label %ret >> ret: >> ret i32 -1 >> } >> >> The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. > > I'm not sure I understand completely. We should be able to rely on the indirectbr label arguments to identify blocks that are li...

...:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-f80:128:128-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32-S32" > >> > target triple = "i686-pc-mingw32" > >> > > >> > declare i32 @a_outside_func(i32) > >> > > >> > define i32 @test_func() { > >> > entry: > >> > %call = call i32 @a_outside_func(i32 15) > >> > ret i32 %call > >> > } > >> > > >> > where a_outside_func is a function defined on my code: > >> > > >> > extern "C"...

...ckaddress(@test_fun, %test_label) > } > > define i32 @test_fun() nounwind { > entry: > ret i32 -1 > test_label: > br label %ret > ret: > ret i32 -1 > } > > The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. > > The code generator doesn't want dead blocks coming into it for various reasons, so removing them is important. I guess we'll...

...estcase: define i8* @test1() nounwind { entry: ret i8* blockaddress(@test_fun, %test_label) } define i32 @test_fun() nounwind { entry: ret i32 -1 test_label: br label %ret ret: ret i32 -1 } The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. The code generator doesn't want dead blocks coming into it for various reasons, so removing them is important. I guess we'll have to d...

Hi, i ran into a problem when using blockaddress() with a label in another function. It seems to me that LLVM tries to remove the label used in blockaddress because it seems like it is not used, but in fact it may be used somewhere with a indirectbr. I attached a small test-case that produces this error. (The original problem is much more complicated, so i hope the reduced example, which has no

...;> >> define i32 @test_fun() nounwind { >> entry: >> ret i32 -1 >> test_label: >> br label %ret >> ret: >> ret i32 -1 >> } >> >> The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. >> >> The code generator doesn't want dead blocks coming into it for various reasons, so removing them is important. I guess w...

...nd { > >> entry: > >> ret i32 -1 > >> test_label: > >> br label %ret > >> ret: > >> ret i32 -1 > >> } > >> > >> The basic problem is that we codegen test1, which generates a reference to test_label, then we codegen test_func. The optimization passes that run before the code generator (UnreachableBlockElim & CodeGenPrepare) zap dead blocks, so test_label was being deleted. > >> > >> The code generator doesn't want dead blocks coming into it for various reasons, so removing them is important....

...gt;>> struct my_str __str_my_str; >>>> >>>> struct my_str2 { >>>> int x; >>>> int y; >>>> int z; >>>> }; >>>> struct my_str2 __str_my_str2; >>>> >>>> test_func(__builtin_bpf_typeid(&__str_my_str)); >>>> test_func(__builtin_bpf_typeid(&__str_my_str2)); >>>> mov r1, 1 >>>> call 4660 >>>> mov r1, 2 >>>> call 4660 >>> >>> thi...

Hi, When REnouveau came to "74/75 test_interesting_registers" the CPU used 100% and I could only use the mouse, but not interact witt anything. What could be wrong? I am using GeForce 6150 and Fedora 7. Love, Louise

...son > > as exhibited by this simple test: > > > > struct sk_buff { > > int foo; > > }; > > > > int invoke(struct sk_buff *skb, int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *)) > > { > > return okfn(skb); > > } > > > > extern int test_func(struct sk_buff *); > > > > int invoke2(struct sk_buff *skb) > > { > > return test_func(skb); > > } > > > > In the generated asm on sparc64, invoke2() gets a tail-call > > whereas invoke() does not. Hmmm... > > Pasha (<snort2004...

...tried the pattern matching first, however, the intrinsic function is matching with a normal function call. For example, I have the following IR, which contains intrinsic function "foo": ***************************************************************************************** *define i32 @test_func() {* *EntryBlock:* * %0 = call i32 @llvm.foo.i32.i32(i32 2, i32 3)* * ret i32 %0* *}* *declare i32 @llvm.foo.i32.i32(i32, i32)* ******************************************************************************************* In InstroInfo.td, I define a pseudo instruction like this : ****************...

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 17:05:59 +0000 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 08:50 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > It's not really an oops, just a warning that stack space got quiet > > tight. > > > > The problem seems to be that the br netfilter code is nesting far too > > deeply and recursing several times. Looks like a design

...tions) using these pointers in the loop. (extracted only the relevant instructions): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- define protected amdgpu_kernel void @test_func(i32 %arg1, i32 %arg2) { entry: %arrayidx274 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %arg1 --------- br i1 %cmp1, label %header, label %for.end header: % struct_var2.ld = load %struct_var2*, %struct_var2* addrspace(4)* ge...

Hi, All, I want to add one intrinsic function for my particular backend. Let's say the intrinsic function is named "foo" which takes two i32 inputs and has one i32 output. First, I add this line "def int_foo : Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadArgMem]>;" in /include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td. Then, in my target/InstrInfo.td, I'm supposed

...tions) using these pointers in the loop. (extracted only the relevant instructions): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- define protected amdgpu_kernel void @test_func(i32 %arg1, i32 %arg2) { entry: %arrayidx274 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %arg1 --------- br i1 %cmp1, label %header, label %for.end header: % struct_var2.ld = load %struct_var2*, %struct_var2* addrspace(4)* ge...

...l require fields_for though. And that’s where the problem lies. ActionView::TemplateError (undefined method `fields_for'' for "#<ActionView::Helpers::FormBuilder:0x944ea28>":String) on line #3 of app/views/trials/observe.rjs: 1: page.alert(''before'') 2: test_func = pluralize(6, ''cat'') 3: @form.fields_for :org_detail do |w| 4: page[''section_two''].replace_html :partial => "mypartial", :locals => { :f => w } 5: end 6: page.alert(''after'') As you can see, the pluralize method seem...