search for: usebb

...It++){ Instruction *pUseInstr = dyn_cast<Instruction>(*useIt); //This is the current use of the defInsn }* However, this code later on does not work and shows the def of %29 to have no uses [not the case] (pIRI here is a data structure we've created which keeps track of defs and useBBs. The defs part works fine.): *for (std::map<BasicBlock*, InstrRelInfo::UseInfo*>::iterator useBB_iter = pIRI->useBBs.begin(); useBB_iter != pIRI->useBBs.end(); ++useBB_iter) { for (InstrRelInfo::UseInfo::iterator use_iter = (*useBB_iter).second->begin();...

...> > LLVM special cases "not reachable from entry", and says that no matter what, > #2 is true if %a is unreachable. > > The code is, IMHO, not even self-consistent > > > // Any unreachable use is dominated, even if Def == User. > if (!isReachableFromEntry(UseBB)) > return true; > > // Unreachable definitions don't dominate anything. > if (!isReachableFromEntry(DefBB)) > return false; > > > > Riddle me this: If unreachable definitions dominate nothing, how are > unreachable uses always dominated by their un...

On 25 February 2015 at 10:58, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Rafael Espíndola > <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Maybe. >> > My view is the ideal is either no-unreachable code, or unreachable >> > blocks >> > only contain terminators. >> >> I am

..."not reachable from entry", and says that no matter what, >> #2 is true if %a is unreachable. >> >> The code is, IMHO, not even self-consistent >> >> >> // Any unreachable use is dominated, even if Def == User. >> if (!isReachableFromEntry(UseBB)) >> return true; >> >> // Unreachable definitions don't dominate anything. >> if (!isReachableFromEntry(DefBB)) >> return false; >> >> >> >> Riddle me this: If unreachable definitions dominate nothing, how are >> u...

When looking into https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24866, I discovered that the root cause of the crash is that I was expecting every basic block to have a corresponding Node in the dominator tree. Apparently, the "while.end" basic block in the example does not have a Node in the Dominator Tree. Can anyone tell me if this is expected? If so, under what circumstances?