similar to: Advise on which copy to use.

I am, from a front end, calling functions like LLVMModuleCreateWithName, found in Core.h, ultimately calling LLVMWriteBitcodeToFile, found in BitWriter.h. Do I correctly presume, from the existence of LLVMDisposeModule, that I am responsible for calling it when I'm done? Will I need to do deeper disposing myself? I presume at least I will need to free strings I allocated myself, such as the

According to the Assembly language reference: "In LLVM, opaque types can eventually be resolved to any type (not just a structure type)." But the only way I can think of to do so is to give it a type name, then later redeclare the name. But that gives an error: %TO = type opaque %TF = type i32 ( %TO* ) %TO = type %TF gives: $ llvm-as types1.ll llvm-as: types1.ll:3:1: error:

It's now a multi-stage process. First, there is a difference between a permanent forward declaration (i.e. the actual definition is in a different file) and a temporary forward declaration (i.e. it will appear later in the same file). To create a permanent forward declaration: DICompositeType *result = m_DIBuilder->createForwardDecl( dwarf::DW_TAG_structure_type,

Before metadata was separated from values, I could create a debug info forward declaration and eventually resolve it using LLVMReplaceAllUsesWith in core.h. Now, I can't figure out how to resolve it. I can find no function that seems to do this. My one wild guess that giving the forward decl and the resolving decl the same UniqueId might do it is not working. I am currently using 3.6.1, but

I need to set the 'next' attribute on a parameter. If the function is to be directly called, i.e., a function constant, I am getting what I want as follows (using the C 'Core.h' binding) 1) Build a function type, using LLVMFunctionType. 2) Build a function value, passing the result of 1) to LLVMAddFunction 3) Go through the formal parameters of 2), using LLVMGet[First|Next]Param,

> On Feb 5, 2017, at 7:13 PM, Rodney M. Bates via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > A couple of Modula-3 developers have worked on splicing LLVM on as an alternative > back end to the Modula-3 compiler, out-of-tree (the LLVM tree), of course. A major > portion of the necessary glue code is there, and at one time, I was able to get the > M3 compiler and the

On 08/24/2017 09:40 AM, Tim Northover wrote: > On 17 August 2017 at 15:15, Rodney M. Bates via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> For an indirect call, i.e., on a function whose address is runtime variable, >> I can't find any place/way to attach this attribute. LLVMAddAttribute >> won't take a type. > > In the C++ API you'd add the

On 11/15/2015 01:29 PM, Tim Northover wrote: > On 15 November 2015 at 09:01, Rodney M. Bates via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> The latter is reduced to machine code by llc, the former is not, instead >> coming through as an external function call, which then fails to link. > > Is this for x86? I don't think that has a single instruction to >

On 07/25/2015 08:57 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 at 06:48 Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop <mailto:rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>> wrote: > > In trying to write a C binding for DIBuilder of llvm 3.6.1, I can't see a way to unwrap > llvm::DITypeRef, declared in include/llvm/IR/DebugInfo.h. This is a class with one > data member, a

In trying to write a C binding for DIBuilder of llvm 3.6.1, I can't see a way to unwrap llvm::DITypeRef, declared in include/llvm/IR/DebugInfo.h. This is a class with one data member, a pointer to Metadata. If I try to make my C type a struct with one pointer, I can't cast it to DITypeRef. If I try to go inside the classes and use the pointer, I can cast, but can't construct a

Have I correctly inferred below, how I build IR and debug info for a function type and a function (value), in particular, how to supply the names of the formal parameters? To create a function in llvm IR and give names to its formal parameters, I must: 1. Build a LLVMTypeRef for the type of each formal and the function result. 2. Build a function type using LLVMFunctionType, from the results of

On 07/27/2015 10:59 AM, Rodney M. Bates wrote: > > > On 07/25/2015 08:57 PM, Andrew Wilkins wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 at 06:48 Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop <mailto:rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>> wrote: >> >> In trying to write a C binding for DIBuilder of llvm 3.6.1, I can't see a way to unwrap >> llvm::DITypeRef, declared in

On 04/10/2014 09:02 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek wrote: > On 4/10/2014 8:40 PM, Rodney M. Bates wrote: >> >> I could probably create llvm IR in this style by generating explicit >> address arithmetic, but I suspect that might hurt the optimization >> possibilities, perhaps a lot. It looks like re-raising the level to >> field numbers would not be horribly difficult,

I have a smallish compilation that contains calls on intrinsics @llvm.maxnum.f32 and @llvm.fabs.f32: %fminmax = call float @llvm.maxnum.f32(float %fabs5, float %fabs) %fabs = call float @llvm.fabs.f32(float %v.6) The latter is reduced to machine code by llc, the former is not, instead coming through as an external function call, which then fails to link. I can't see any differences

The language I am working on connecting to an llvm back-end (Modula-3) allows a fairly extensive set of recursive declarations. It looks like I can translate all its high-level types using four llvm types that refer to another type: function, struct, pointer, and array. It looks like I can alter an llvm struct type in place after it has been created, using StructType::setBody. I don't see a

On 08/03/2014 05:30 PM, Justin Bogner wrote: > "Rodney M. Bates" <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop> writes: >> I can build llvm 3.4.2 fine, using instructions in GettingStarted.html, >> and making assumptions to account for my using tar files instead of svn. >> Although I had downloaded and extracted both llvm-3.4.2.src.tar.gz and >> cfe-3.4.2.src.tar.gz, giving

On 01/20/2015 12:45 PM, Reid Kleckner wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop <mailto:rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>> wrote: > > 1) Larger structs are returned differently, via memcpy. Do > these methods of returning struct values show through in > the ultimately generated machine code? It seems hard to

I can build llvm 3.4.2 fine, using instructions in GettingStarted.html, and making assumptions to account for my using tar files instead of svn. Although I had downloaded and extracted both llvm-3.4.2.src.tar.gz and cfe-3.4.2.src.tar.gz, giving directories llvm-3.4.2.src and cfe-3.4.2.src, clang apparently did not get built. The only files with names starting with "clang" anywhere

This is partly an llvm question, and maybe partly C++. I am trying to make calls on code in the llvm infrastructure.(3.4.2) I appear to be missing some include files, but don't know how to track them down. I get compile errors on existing llvm header files, like the following two examples: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In file included

For this C code: typedef struct s2 { char s2C1 , s2C2; } s2td; clang generates: %struct.s2 = type { i8, i8 } which I lets llvm decide on the actual layout of this type. For the return statement in: struct s2 fs2 ( char fs2p1 ) { struct s2 ls2; ls2.s2C1 = 'B'; ls2.s2C2 = fs2p1; return ls2; } I see this IR: %struct.s2 =