similar to: load with alignment of 1 crashes from being unaligned

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > 2017-06-19 8:45 GMT-07:00 Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > >> Greetings, >> >> I have a Zig implementation of ceil which is emitted into LLVM IR like >> this: >> >> ; Function Attrs: nobuiltin nounwind >> define

When zig updated to llvm 5 we started hitting this assertion: zig: /home/andy/downloads/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/Support/Casting.h:106: static bool llvm::isa_impl_cl<To, const From*>::doit(const From*) [with To = llvm::Instruction; From = llvm::Value]: Assertion `Val && "isa<> used on a null pointer"' failed. I wonder if however this was caused by an

Can you please open a bug on bugzilla and attach the ir testcase? Your fix doesn't look right (just hiding the assertion failure) On Sep 17, 2017 10:45 AM, "Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev" < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > What do you think about this patch? > > --- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/NewGVN.cpp > +++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/NewGVN.cpp > @@

So, 90% of the time I've seen this, it was memory corruption, usually use after free. I know I fixed one after 5.0 branched. You should compile with address sanitizer enabled, and I suspect you will find the issue quicky. If not, we really need ir that reproduces it. On Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 12:27 PM Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I think I forgot to

using `opt --print-after-all -O3` I see that EarlyCSE is interpreting the call to `ceil` and constant fold: *** IR Dump After Early CSE *** ; Function Attrs: nobuiltin nounwind define i1 @do_test() #2 { Entry: %0 = call fastcc float @ceil(float 0.000000e+00) #6 %1 = call fastcc float @ceil32(float 0.000000e+00) #6 %2 = fcmp fast oeq float 0.000000e+00, %1 ret i1 %2 } So just running `opt

Greetings, I have a Zig implementation of ceil which is emitted into LLVM IR like this: ; Function Attrs: nobuiltin nounwind define internal fastcc float @ceil(float) unnamed_addr #3 !dbg !644 { Entry: %x = alloca float, align 4 store float %0, float* %x call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata float* %x, metadata !649, metadata !494), !dbg !651 %1 = load float, float* %x, !dbg !652 %2 =

Dump the IR before newgvn and run through opt -newgvn. It should crash. I'm not familiar with your frontend but you might want to use -mllvm -opt-bisect-limit. On Sep 17, 2017 1:06 PM, "Andrew Kelley" <superjoe30 at gmail.com> wrote: Valgrind is strictly better than address sanitizer, is that right? It runs valgrind-clean: [nix-shell:~/dev/zig/build-llvm5-debug]$ valgrind

I just reported this bug: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35314 This very simple IR is causing infinite recursion in llvm::DwarfUnit::getOrCreateTypeDIE in llvm 5.0.0. Is there a workaround? Is anyone willing to save me a recompile and check if this is fixed in 5.0.1 or trunk? `clang -c test.ll` repros the issue. ; ModuleID = 'test' source_filename = "test" target

Hi, I see things like this. What does it mean? Is it documented somewhere? Thanks. ; preds = %for.body https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html ; <label>:91: ; preds = %88 %92 = load i8**, i8*** @glob_complete_word.matches, align 8, !dbg !99798 %93 = load i32, i32* @glob_complete_word.ind, align 4, !dbg !99799 %94 = sext i32 %93 to i64, !dbg !99798

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Tim > Northover via llvm-dev > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 3:07 AM > To: Nat! > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] A question to the DWARF experts on symbol > indirection > > Hi Nat!, > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 at 01:21, Nat! via

Hi, I am wondering if this behavior of creating debug info is correct. A type in compile unit entry is pointing to a type under subprogram entry?! This is the root cause of https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27579 0x0000000b: DW_TAG_compile_unit [1] * 0x00000026: DW_TAG_pointer_type [2] DW_AT_type [DW_FORM_ref4] (cu + 0x002c => {0x0000002c})

> I disagree. This should be handled by the type legalization > infrastructure. huh... As far as I know, the type legalization is in the SelectionDAG phase, and it is also in the backend. Am I right? or I miss something. > there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24 You say "there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24", does it means I can

I think Duncan and I disagree. Generally I would defer to anybody else on this list: my experience is backend Target only, with very little poking around the internals. I'm usually asking, not answering, questions here: the 24 bit floats reminded me of the "good old days" at ATI. That said, I think you could make f32/i32 work for your purposes - given the limited types

Hi, > I am not sure how legalizer and friends deal with i24 / f24 as legal > types. the type legalizer currently assumes that all legal integer types have a power-of-two number of bits. I don't see any obstacles to making it more general though. First off, i24 would need to be added to the list of simple value types. Then the integer promotion and expansion logic would need to be

Hi, I am writing a backend and having issues with properly lowering the result of getElementPtr ( specifically the add node that it generates). If we take this IR: %struct.rectangle = type { i24, i24 } ; Function Attrs: nounwind readonly define i24 @area(%struct.rectangle* nocapture readonly %r) #0 { entry: %width = getelementptr inbounds %struct.rectangle* %r, i16 0, i32 0 %0 = load i24*

On Wednesday 26 November 2008 09:31:26 Wei wrote: > O...k... I try to make some conclusions: > > 1) The conversion from f32 to f24 or i32 to i24 should be written in > the backend. I disagree. This should be handled by the type legalization infrastructure. After all, that's what it is for! However there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24. On the other

Hi David, OK, I got that DIE in Compile Unit scope may point to a DIE in subprogram scope. But how about that we are emitting a subprogram entry that has no attributes? 0x0000002b: DW_TAG_subprogram [3] * 0x0000002c: DW_TAG_typedef [4] DW_AT_type [DW_FORM_ref4] (cu + 0x0040 => {0x00000040}) DW_AT_name [DW_FORM_strp] (

O...k... I try to make some conclusions: 1) The conversion from f32 to f24 or i32 to i24 should be written in the backend. Because we should not put any hardware dependent behaviors in the frontend. If we may change our H/W platform to another one which supports f32, i32 natively, we will only need to change the backend codes. For example: The backend approach means that integer division is a

Hi Steve, Thanks for the tip regarding MIOperandInfo, I didn't think of that part of the tablegen description. Sadly, I did actually mean: r1 = *(i0 += m0). So increment i0 by m0. Read memory the memory location "pointed" to by i0. Store in r1. Sadly I am not too familiar with compiler terminology, so I don't know if there is a proper term for such a load. On Thu, Oct 23,

On Nov 22, 2008, at 7:48 AM, Wei wrote: > Do you mean MVT::getIntegerVT? Because I can not find > getExtendedIntegerVT in the llvm source codes. > I am excited seeing this function, however I have the following more > questions. See ValueTypes.h and ValueTypes.cpp. Also this example: @str = internal constant [4 x i8] c"%d\0A\00" define void @foo2(i24 %a, i24 %b) nounwind