similar to: Debugging LLVM IR - Reviving the DebugIR pass

>> This work could also be used to fix [3]. Although this probably needs >> more though because there's the question of whether we should preserve >> existing debug information in an LLVM IR file or write over it when it >> is given to Clang. > > If foo.ll contains edited debug info, `clang -g` shouldn't silently drop > the edits. A warning + no-op seems

Please do take over the pass revival. College hasn't left me with the bandwidth to continue this side project :) If there's small things here and there, I'd be happy to pitch in. However,.whipping the patch into shape is beyond me right now. Thanks Siddharth On Fri 23 Mar, 2018, 00:53 via llvm-dev, <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > >> This work could also

You can attach debug info to the Llvm module about LLVM IR, at which point one can throw the executable into any debugger and get llvm level debugging. I've started a patch to revive this feature (DebugIR pass). I've been sidetracked the past month, but I'll come back to it soon :) https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778 Cheers, Siddharth On Thu 4 Jan, 2018, 09:23 Brenda So via llvm-dev,

Hi, I recently had the need to see the correspondence between some Clang generated LLVM IR and the compiled machine code within a debugger (lldb in this case). Unfortunately it looks like the functionality to do this used to be in a pass called 'DebugIR' but was removed due to the lack of a maintainer [1]. It appears an attempt was made [2] to revive this but it appears to have stalled.

Hi I am looking at open projects that LLVM want to implement and it seems to be a suggestion to write an LLVM IR level debugger. Is there any existing LLVM projects out there that already does such a thing? If not, I would like to try implementing one myself. By debugger, I think it means something like gdb, where you can insert breakpoints, run code and observe layout of registers and memory at

Hi Dan, Having missed this functionality myself in the past I’m excited to see this gain traction. Let me know if there’s anything I can do to help this along. Cheers, Jonas On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 at 18:19, Dan Liew via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I recently had the need to see the correspondence between some Clang > generated LLVM IR and the compiled

We have implemented a debug pass to enable debugging of jitted functions. The pass dumps the IR of the module at the beginning of the pass, which then becomes the source code for the debug metadata. Our solution focuses on a windows x86 solution but I’m sure it would be easy to extend to other platforms. In order to load the resulting debugging info into Visual Studio, we jit to object file then

>> This work could also be used to fix [3]. Although this probably needs >> more though because there's the question of whether we should preserve >> existing debug information in an LLVM IR file or write over it when it >> is given to Clang. > > > If foo.ll contains edited debug info, `clang -g` shouldn't silently drop the > edits. A warning + no-op

+ 1 to having this functionality implemented as `llvm-as -g` or some analog (`clang -g foo.ll`). As I outlined in https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778>, I think such a solution can be made to work for JIT users who don't have on-disk *.ll files. > On Mar 21, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Jason Surprise via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >

I see. Is there a pre-existing way to do this in LLVM? Cheers, ~Siddharth. On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 at 02:12 Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > ConstantExprs are immutable, they can't be changed once they are created. > And a ConstantExpr can reference other ConstantExprs. So replacing all uses > of a Value in a ConstantExpr would require creating a new immutable

Whoops, sorry, I meant "value->replaceAllUsesWith". Should I create a new post with an updated title? Thanks Siddharth On Thu 17 Aug, 2017, 01:05 Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 August 2017 at 15:39, (IIIT) Siddharth Bhat via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > From what I have observed, using

Hi List, My IR compiles fine and runs. I've tried to add DebugIR pass so as to be able to debug and profile it (since source is an SQL query all that I can debug and profile is IR itself). When I tried to add it to pass manager I got the following assert: Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. 0x00007ffff3fe4425 in __GI_raise (sig=<optimized out>) at

Hi Andrew I am newbie. There are many headers and classes, I do not know how to use to add dwarf info to bc file. Can you show me the demo or example, is there any info about how to use these classes step by step. BR Owen 发件人: Andrew Kelley [mailto:superjoe30 at gmail.com] 发送时间: 2017年11月15日 12:51 收件人: Wuweijia <wuweijia at huawei.com> 抄送: 陳韋任

Hello all, I've seen some discussion that InstCombine is "too general" and that llvm should implement a proper graph rewrite mechanism: Link to llvm-dev discussion about this: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-May/113219.html, Link to review where this came up (and I first heard about it): https://reviews.llvm.org/D37195. I wanted to understand what the current issues

The GEP constructor does not assert that the source and destination types match. Of course, this is incorrect and causes random failures somewhere down the line. Could I add general sanity checks to the GEP constructor? In general, is an Instruction allowed to be in an inconsistent state? If so, is there some well known method to "verify" whether an instruction is consistent or not?

As the question asks. IIRC, I have only seen constants use to: 1. setup globals 2. as "constant parameters" to instructions. In both these cases, from what I understand, they will have a single use. Is it possible to create a Constant with multiple use(r)s? Thanks, Siddharth -- Sending this from my phone, please excuse any typos! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

Hello all, >From what I have observed, using `Inst->replaceAllUsesWith` does not replace uses of the `Inst` in `ConstantExpr`s. Is there some way to have a universal replaceAllUsesWith? Thanks, ~Siddharth. -- Sending this from my phone, please excuse any typos! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello all, This is a general question regarding type conversion: from: <ty>** to: [<size> x <ty>]* >From what I understand, bitcast is wrong in this case because a GEP into a <ty>** should be computed differently from a GEP into [<size> x <ty>]*. So, what is the correct way to perform this type conversion? Thanks, Siddharth -- Sending this from my

What would the "correct form of GEP be"? Thanks, Siddharth On Fri 11 Aug, 2017, 23:47 Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev, < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 8/11/2017 3:40 PM, Siddharth Bhat via llvm-dev wrote: > > > > This is a general question regarding type conversion: > > > > from: <ty>** > > to: [<size> x <ty>]* >

Hello all, I have a custom allocator, and would like to teach LLVM about its semantics. In particular, I would like LLVM to kill allocations that are "dead", similar to dead new in C++. Consider this example: ; ModuleID = '<stdin>' source_filename = "Module" ; Function Attrs: inaccessiblememonly noinline norecurse nounwind declare i8* @alloc(i64)