similar to: Moving instructions from source Basic Block to dest Basic Block

I was trying to run the simplify CFG Pass in LLVM , and delete an unreachable basic block ("continuation" below ) after running one of my own IR transforms , but I keep getting the error - While deleting: i8* %g Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: store i8 0, i8* %g I am well aware of what that means, but isn't the whole purpose of the "simplifyCFGPass" to

Hi, I was wondering how I can print out the result of some arithmetic on 128 bit integers. After having a look at the API , it seems it is possible to get the integer value from the "ConstantInt::getSextValue() " but the return value is only a int64_t. I wish to print it on the console output and printing as a string or decimal ( using C standard library printf ) My Question :

This [1] might worth reading, Malhar. [1] http://llvm.org/docs/HowToSetUpLLVMStyleRTTI.html 2017-06-10 4:12 GMT+08:00 Tim Northover via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > On 9 June 2017 at 12:03, Jajoo, Malhar via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Is there some way around this ( without suggesting a change to my entire > AST ) ? > > LLVM

Hi, Just had a simple question , The use-def and def-use chains provided by llvm::Value class , would they work for IR that has not been optimized by the "mem2reg" pass ? ( ie, IR code that contains memory interactions and is not in SSA form yet ) Thanks, Malhar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 9 June 2017 at 15:29, Jajoo, Malhar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Thanks for that , I have read the documentation on this , but I would like to know > if it would be the right thing to do , ie , changing the enum within llvm::Type Well, I find the idea of a non-canonical DummyType slightly disturbing (I don't think it's something we'd ever support

Hi, I was wondering if it was possible to create a Dummy Type by subclassing LLVM Type. I do not want to create a new type or even do much with this dummy type , all I need is a placeholder type until I generate IR. I want to use this approach as most of my AST is already configured to accept a Type* and not a DummyType* ( which is my own class ) I explored this a bit and did manage to

Hi everyone, I just had a question - I am aware that LLVM supports it's own form of RTTI ( using dyn_cast<>() ,etc) but I wish to use C++ RTTI currently. I have tried building with "cmake -G "Unix Makefiles" -LLVM_ENABLE_RTTI=ON" but that doesnt seem to remove the "fno-rtti" flag from llvm-config and I still get an error when I try using

Hi, I was trying to print out a 128 bit result at runtime using a call to printf in LLVM. I am able to print 32 uptil 64 bit integers using the format string "%d" in printf . Please see the code in red below , as I am having a bit difficulty in trying to print the 128 bit value computed at runtime. The code in red is never executed since the value may never be casted to a

Dear all, here is the result of R.Version(): > R.Version() $platform [1] "powerpc-apple-darwin8.6.0" $arch [1] "powerpc" $os [1] "darwin8.6.0" $system [1] "powerpc, darwin8.6.0" $status [1] "" $major [1] "2" $minor [1] "3.1" $year [1] "2006" $month [1] "06" $day [1] "01" $`svn rev`

Hi, I am new to clustering and was wondering why pvclust using "maximum" as distance measure nearly always results in p-values above 95%. I wrote an example programme which demonstrates this effect. I uploaded a PDF showing the results Here is the code which produces the PDF file: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s <-

Hi, all I'd like to write a code that can build different codes based on LLVM version. Like code snippets in the below. #ifdef __LLVM_29__ PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI (Type::getDoubleTy(getGlobalContext()), 2, "iftmp"); #elif __LLVM_28__ PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI (Type::getDoubleTy(getGlobalContext()), "iftmp"); #else assert ("wrong

Hello, I'm doing some Def/Use analysis, and I'm hung up on one tricky spot. The BB in question is attached. Ignore the red. The issue is that '%13 = load...' instruction does not show up as a Use for the '%scevgep25' definition, and I feel like it should. Instead, it shows up as a Use for '%iftmp.55.0 = select...', though Operand(0) for this '%13 =

Hi All, I was wondering if there is an optimisation pass that moves a stack allocated array, initialised with constant values, to a global constant array. And if there is such a pass, what requirements are there for it to operate? My optimised IR is below. As you can see an array of 5 integers is created with alloca, then each element is stored to in turn. It would be nice if this array was

Here's an initial stab, but I'm not too happy about the temporarily adding new instructions then removing it because returning it will have it added back in to replace other uses. I also added a couple test cases pass with the new InstructionCombining changes (the old code only passes one of the added tests). Also, this change exposes some simplification for

Dear R-users I have a problem choosing initial points for the function arms() in the package HI I intend to implement a Gibbs sampler and one of my conditional distributions is nonstandard and not logconcave. Therefore I'd like to use arms. But there seem to be a strong influence of the initial point y.start. To show the effect I constructed a demonstration example. It is reproducible

Hi, I am trying to run the command "forward.sel.par," however I receive the error message: "Error: could not find function 'simpleRDA2'." I have the vegan library loaded. The documentation on "varpart" has not helped me to understand why I cannot call this function. Maybe I am missing something obvious because I am still an 'R' novice. Below is a

Dear All, I have, in an LLVM bitcode program, the following phi node: %iftmp.225.0 = phi i8* [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str12597431, i32 0, i32 0), %bb114 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), %bb111 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), %bb111 ] This phi instruction has two arguments for the same incoming basic block. The only reason why it passes

On Mar 17, 2009, at 11:37 AMPDT, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > I have, in an LLVM bitcode program, the following phi node: > > %iftmp.225.0 = phi i8* [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str12597431, > i32 0, > i32 0), %bb114 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 > 0), > %bb111 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), > %bb111 ]

Hi, I have this piece of code: tm = local ? localtime(&curr) : gmtime(&curr); if (!tm) return NULL; which translates into something like: ---------------------------------------------- entry: %iftmp.0 = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 %tm = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 ... // Declares iftmp.0 as iftmp.0 call void @llvm.dbg.declare( { }* %iftmp.0, { }* bitcast

Hi, directory<- "/home/arunksa111/data.new" #first function filelist<-function(directory,number,list1){ setwd(directory) filelist1<-dir(directory) direct<-dir(directory,pattern = paste("MSMS_",number,"PepInfo.txt",sep=""), full.names = FALSE, recursive = TRUE) list1<-lapply(direct, function(x) read.table(x,header=TRUE, sep =