similar to: An update on the DominatorTree and incremental dominators

This is release_50 branch of git, sha1: f1d5723be3f9456a6b16cdf687847ac2918846de Using gcc 7.2.0 from homebrew. $ CC=/usr/local/opt/gcc/bin/x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0-gcc-7 CXX=/usr/local/opt/gcc/bin/x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0-g++-7 cmake .. -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/Users/andy/local/llvm5 -DCMAKE_PREFIX_PATH=/Users/andy/local/llvm5 $ make VERBOSE=1 [ 92%] Linking CXX

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > I'll try the trunk, as well as check my code again. If indeed it's not > fixed, I'll try to post a triggering case here. > Thanks for the advice~ > Did you run the -mergereturn pass (it might also be called UnifyExitNodes in the source code)? This is the pass that ensures that each function has exactly one basic block that returns control to the

Thank you John. Actually the opt tool (from LLVM 3.2 version) can generate the needed graphs (with pass "-domfrontier"). But I just want to surely know is there some pass or builder which can be integrated somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Control-Dependence-Graph-builder-tp56687p56689.html Sent

Hi Guys, I am using the Postdom pass and I would like to get the root of the tree. However, everytime I try to get the root, I get a segfault. I don't know why the environment can't find DominatorTreeBase. Below is the code that generates the Segfault. In my .h file I include Dominators.h PDT.getRootNode(); //PDT is a reference to a PostDominatorTree dyld: lazy symbol binding

On 4/12/13 3:19 PM, Arsen wrote: > Thank you John. > Actually the opt tool (from LLVM 3.2 version) can generate the needed graphs > (with pass "-domfrontier"). > But I just want to surely know is there some pass or builder which can be > integrated somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? Yes and no. There's isn't a control dependence pass in LLVM

Hi Mikhail, As Brian noted, stuff like this works better in the new pass manager. Even in the old pass manager I thought it should work though. Did you initialize the pass, via `INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass)`? Did you require it, via ` AU.addRequired<PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass>();`? Btw. May I ask what you are planning to do? Cheers, Johannes On 01/07,

Many published analyses which build on post-dominance assume a canonical single-dominator-tree form induced by unifying all exits (and often adding a virtual edge from START to END). In contrast, it seems that the current LLVM post-dominator analysis only operates in a mode in which it generates a forest of post-dominator trees, with one rooted at each exit node. The problem this can cause is

Thanks for your reply, John. I am using opt to run my pass. Should opt by default link in the library? Would you please give me some idea on fixing it? Thanks! opt -load ../../../Debug+Asserts/lib/LLVMHello.dylib -hello < hello.bc > /dev/null My pass is just: #include "llvm/IR/Function.h" #include "llvm/Pass.h" #include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h" #include

Hi all, I am trying to traverse a dominator tree and have encountered a weird runtime exception: Here's my simple code: virtual bool runOnFunction(Function &F) { DominatorTree& DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); * DomTreeNode* rootNode = DT.getRootNode();* return false. } Here's the documentation page:

On 4/11/13 10:30 PM, Bill He wrote: > Hi all, > > I am trying to traverse a dominator tree and have encountered a weird > runtime exception: > > Here's my simple code: > > virtual bool runOnFunction(Function &F) { > DominatorTree& DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); > > * DomTreeNode* rootNode = DT.getRootNode();* > return false.

On 4/12/13 9:51 AM, Bill He wrote: > Thanks for your reply, John. > > I am using opt to run my pass. Should opt by default link in the > library? Would you please give me some idea on fixing it? Thanks! Odd. I would think that opt would have that pass linked in statically. I'm not sure why it's not working. Does anyone else have an idea? -- John T. > > opt -load

On Aug 24, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Jonathan Ragan-Kelley wrote: > Many published analyses which build on post-dominance assume a > canonical single-dominator-tree form induced by unifying all exits > (and often adding a virtual edge from START to END). In contrast, it > seems that the current LLVM post-dominator analysis only operates in a > mode in which it generates a forest of

Hi there, I'm currently writing an analysis (for now) pass for LLVM that kind of need some information from the CallGraph of the program. This info would be extremely easy to get if I could build the DominatorTree information about the CallGraph. I even checked out and saw the declarations of GraphTraits templates for CallGraph and CallGraphNode, which might indicate that all algorithms that

Hi Weibo, I thought would be more efficient discussing here (I just saw that every info was replicated on both emails you were sending to me). I just run your example here on my working machine, and I didn't have any issues with the namespace. Just tell me one thing: which line (and flags) are you using when configuring and make your build llvm directory? Oh, and one more thing: what is on

Hi everyone, I write a new FunctionPass which wants to use pass PostDominatorTree, so I implement the next function: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<PostDominatorTree>(); AU.setPreservesAll(); } Then I get PDT through the next statement: PostDominatorTree *PDT = &getAnalysis<PostDominatorTree>(); My code can be successfully

Dear all, while trying to build llvm with shared libraries using GCC (tested both in Ubuntu 14.04 and Ubuntu 16.04) as in cmake -G Ninja -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON I run into the following link error lib/Transforms/IPO/CMakeFiles/LLVMipo.dir/PartialInlining.cpp.o: In function `llvm::ForwardDominanceFrontierBase<llvm::BasicBlock>::ForwardDominanceFrontierBase()':

Hi, You need to initialize your pass with: INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass) INITIALIZE_PASS_END(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) So as to both register your pass, and have

Dear all, I would like to use the PostDominatorTree in ArgPromotion. I did not find an example of how to use function level analysis inside CallGraphSCCPass. I tried to follow an example of how to use function-level pass in a module pass, but I hit "llvm_unreachable" in PMDataManager::addLowerLevelRequiredPass. What would be a proper way to make PostDominatorTree available in

On 08/05/2010 06:46 AM, Wenbin Zhang wrote: > Hi all, > I'm using postDominatorTree to do some program analysis. My code works > well for small tests, but when I run it on real applications, the > following error occurs: > /Inorder PostDominator Tree: DFSNumbers invalid: 0 slow queries. > [1] <<exit node>> {0,21} > [2] %bb1 {1,2} > [2] %bb {3,4} > [2]

I have written a module pass. When I use the debug pass structure option, the name of my module pass is printed but then I get "Unnamed pass" when the FunctionPassManagerImpl *FPP calls dumpPassStructure (in PassManager.cpp). Is this the expected behavior, or should I be concerned that there is an error in my approach? Thanks, Scott