search for: valti

Displaying 11 results from an estimated 11 matches for "valti".

Did you mean: valhi
2012 Jan 03
1
[LLVMdev] AliasAnalysis and memory dependency
i am sorry, i get this error: opt: /home/llvm/src/include/llvm/Support/CallSite.h:87: ValTy* llvm::CallSiteBase<FunTy, ValTy, UserTy, InstrTy, CallTy, InvokeTy, IterTy>::getCalledValue() const [with FunTy = const llvm::Function, ValTy = const llvm::Value, UserTy = const llvm::User, InstrTy = const llvm::Instruction, CallTy = const llvm::CallInst, InvokeTy = const llvm::InvokeInst, IterTy =
2012 Jan 03
0
[LLVMdev] AliasAnalysis and memory dependency
Hi neda 8664, > I want to find memory dependency between CallInst instruction and other. So i > used the following code: > > > > / AliasAnalysis &AA=getAnalysis<AliasAnalysis>();/ > > /*if* (isa< StoreInst >(inst1)){ / > > // // /*if* (isa<CallInst>(inst2)) / /{/ > > / CallInst *call_inst2= dyn_cast<CallInst>(inst2); /
2012 Jan 03
2
[LLVMdev] AliasAnalysis and memory dependency
Hi all, I want to find memory dependency between CallInst instruction and other. So i used the following code: * AliasAnalysis &AA=getAnalysis<AliasAnalysis>();* * if(isa<StoreInst>(inst1)){* * ** **if(isa<CallInst>(inst2))**{* * CallInst *call_inst2= dyn_cast<CallInst>(inst2); * * if(AA.getModRefInfo(inst1,call_inst2)==mod)**{* *
2015 May 15
8
[LLVMdev] RFC: New EH representation for MSVC compatibility
After a long tale of sorrow and woe, my colleagues and I stand here before you defeated. The Itanium EH representation is not amenable to implementing MSVC-compatible exceptions. We need a new representation that preserves information about how try-catch blocks are nested. WinEH background ------------------------------- Skip this if you already know a lot about Windows exceptions. On Windows,
2005 Aug 10
1
[LLVMdev] ValueTy not set appropriately in Value.h?
Hi, for some temporary debugging I wanted to know what sort of Value I was seeing, and I ran across this comment in Value.h - it's probably a minor point, but unless I'm missing something I think either the last line of the comment is wrong or the code is. It appears in rev 1.58, as part of fixing bug 122. 00134 /// getValueType - Return an ID for the concrete type of this object.
2014 Jun 12
3
[LLVMdev] Creating and implementing an analysis group out of tree
Hi Eli, Thanks for the link! I'm able to compile a standalone pass outside of the source tree, and I'm obviously ably to compile analysis groups inside the source tree. However, the problem comes when I try to do what the tutorial suggests to create an analysis group outside of the source tree. My understanding is that building out of tree requires different methods to register the
2009 Jan 09
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Store alignment should be LValue alignment, not source alignment
Hi all, Please review this patch. It's fixing PR3232 comment #8. Function bar from 2008-03-24-BitFiled-And-Alloca.c compiles to: %struct.Key = type { { i32, i32 } } ... define i32 @bar(i64 %key_token2) nounwind { entry: %key_token2_addr = alloca i64 ; <i64*> [#uses=2] %retval = alloca i32 ; <i32*> [#uses=2] %iospec =
2015 May 18
4
[LLVMdev] New EH representation for MSVC compatibility
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > I like the way this sorts out with regard to funclet code generation. > It feels very natural for Windows EH, though obviously not as natural for > non-Windows targets and I think it is likely to block some optimizations > that are currently possible with those targets. > Right, it will
2019 Sep 03
2
SourceMgr vs EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
Hi, I'm trying to build llvm (git monorepo) on Ubuntu 18.04 with EXPENSIVE_CHECKS enabled and running into various errors compiling SourceMgr.cpp, depending on which host compiler I use. For example with GCC: $ CC=gcc-8 CXX=g++-8 cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DLLVM_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=ON ~/git/llvm-project/llvm/ && ninja ... [89/2690] Building CXX object
2019 Sep 03
2
SourceMgr vs EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
Hmm. What about the errors I quoted from using clang-7 (starting about a third of the way down my email, sorry if they got kinda lost in all the noise)? Thanks, Jay. On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 20:00, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > Looks to me like a bug in GCC's constexpr+_GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS support. Small test case: > > $ g++-8 test.cpp -std=c++2a
2019 Oct 02
2
SourceMgr vs EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
I just ran into this today. Do we need to update our requirements on libstdc++ version? Jay, did you figure out a way around this? On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:29 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > It's a bug in libstdc++ - so if you have clang using libstdc++ (which it will by default, I think) then it's the same thing. You could try with