similar to: Emitting asm variable directive into MachineBasicBlock

Thank you for your help Tom you are totally right with the registers but the command you suggest also doesn't work. After some research I found the following thread on the mailing list: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-February/110086.html With your help and the information about the condition codes I was able to resolve the error:         BuildMI(BB, BB.end(), DL,

On 03/22/2018 09:29 AM, Julius Hiller via llvm-dev wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm working on a MachineFunctionPass that inserts a list of instructions into an Module so a later Pass can work on them. > To do so I load a dummy .ll file created from a main stub, create the needed function stubs (ModulePass), insert Blocks and create instructions using BuildMI. > I started with

Hello everyone, I'm working on a MachineFunctionPass that inserts a list of instructions into an Module so a later Pass can work on them. To do so I load a dummy .ll file created from a main stub, create the needed function stubs (ModulePass), insert Blocks and create instructions using BuildMI. I started with branch instructions:     const TargetMachine &TM = MF.getTarget();

Hi List, I'm trying to build llvm-5.0.0 with clang-3.7.1 on ARM (native building). At some point I have the following issue : ---- [1588/5024] Building C object projects/compiler-rt/lib/builtins/CMakeFiles/clang_rt.builtins-arm.dir/cpu_model.c.o ../projects/compiler-rt/lib/builtins/cpu_model.c:596:7: warning: ISO C requires a translation unit to contain at least one declaration

Hallo Can anyone tell me the difference between foo$a[2] <- 1 and foo[2,"a"] <- 1 ? I thought that both expressions are equivalent, but when I run the following example, there is obviously a difference. > foo <- data.frame(a=NA,b=NA) > foo a b 1 NA NA > foo$a[1] <- 1 > foo$b[1] <- 2 > foo$a[2] <- 1 Error in `$<-.data.frame`(`*tmp*`,

Dear LLVM developers, Hello, I'm trying to find a way of cross-compiling my c code against Baremetal Cortex-M device (so target triple will be arm-none-eabi) only using LLVM/Clang, and not using anything from GNU (ld or libc). I'm doing this to know which one of LLVM/clang and GCC produces smaller flash image size because saving flash is a big deal in our projects. 1) When I just follow

I want to be able to do two things with LLVM (both just before code emission): 1. Insert a MachineBasicBlock just before a MachineBasicBlock. There is a function called AddPredecessor(). However, the comment says that it does not update the actual CFG. I want to redirect all CFG edges that are incoming to this MachineBasicBlock to the new one I create, and add just one outgoing edge (no branch)

Hello, we can get BasicBlock from MachineBasicBlock through MachineBasicBlock::getBasicBlock() function, but how can I get MachineBasicBlock of a BasicBlock? Thank you!

I don't think you can. The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the same as any BasicBlock values. So MachineFunction::getMachineBasicBlock( BasicBlock::{get the number} ) cannot work. I do not see much in the basic block which can identify it. So you can search for it. typedef struct findBlock {

Also note: there may be multiple MachineBasicBlock's for a single BasicBlock. - David M On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Jeff Kunkel <jdkunk3 at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think you can. > > The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, > so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the > same as any BasicBlock values.

Can you please post the code to split a MachineBasicBlock? I am trying to split a MachineBasicBlock at a specific instruction in the MBB, let us say, into MBB1 and MBB2. This instruction should go into MBB2. Also MBB1 should have an unconditional branch to MBB2 as the terminator. (quite similar to splitBasicBlock in BasicBlock.cpp) Meanwhile, I am trying to come up with a variant of

Hi all, Two days ago MachineBasicBlock got ilistified. What does this mean and how does it affect you? Read on. MachineBasicBlock used to have a std::vector<MachineInstr*> to represent the instructions it constisted of. This representation has the following problems: 1) O(n) insertions/removals to/from anywhere but the end of a basic block (removals are very comomn in peephole

Hi all, While I using BuildMI with MachineBasicBlock as parameter, I made a mistake. The mistake was that the MachineBasicBlock of instruction, which is for insertion, is different with given MachineBasicBlock as parameter. I have thought if there is assertion code to check whether MachineBasicBlocks are same between instruction's MachineBasicBlock and given MachineBasicBlock as

The attached patch fixes bugs related to MachineBasicBlock::iterator. I don't have any test cases that reproduce on an X86 machine the problems that this patch fixes (these bugs were found when make check was run on a mips board). Please review. The first part just ensures that iterator I is not instr_end() before it invokes isInsideBundle(). The second part changes the signature of spillAll

Hi, Why does a MachineBasicBlock have multiple terminator instructions (unlike BasicBlock, which can only have one) ? Thanks, Tom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160324/86ab8873/attachment-0001.html>

Hi all, I think that I came somewhat closer to a solution for splitting a MachineBasicBlock for a PSEUDO_CALL_R instruction and having a label to the new MBB: For following piece of code: --- typedef int callme_t(int a, int b); callme_t* c01; int foo(int a, int b) { return c01(a,b); // MachineBasicBlock will be split at call instruction } --- I have initially following correspondence: BB1

Dear LLVM, I was wondering what's the difference between BasicBlock and MachineBasicBlock in LLVM. If I want to solve a data flow equation problem, which one should I use? Thanks, Jerry

Is there a way to access the current MachineBasicBlock info from within CodeGenIntrinsic in SparcV9BurgISel.cpp? The arguments are: Intrinsic::ID iid, CallInst &callInstr, TargetMachine &target, and std::vector<MachineInstr*>& mvec, none of which seem to offer access to the current MachineBasicBlock. Brent

Hi, > On Mar 24, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Tom Chen via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > Why does a MachineBasicBlock have multiple terminator instructions (unlike BasicBlock, which can only have one) ? Think of it as predicated instructions. E.g., bool = icmp if bool : br if br else As for why, we could indeed have split those terminators into several basic

So in your example there are two terminators in the basic block (`br if` and `br else`)? 2016-03-24 14:15 GMT-04:00 Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com>: > Hi, > > > On Mar 24, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Tom Chen via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > Why does a MachineBasicBlock have multiple terminator instructions >