similar to: [LLVMdev] List Suggestion

Thanks Bill. One more question, when I use the DSNode iterator to traverse a node's children. The return value of I.getNode() can only be 'const DSNode *', I cannot use 'DSNode *' type. So as a result, I always get error message like this: MemLeakage.cpp:159: invalid conversion from `const DSNode*' to `DSNode*' MemLeakage.cpp:159: initializing argument 1 of `void

Also sprach Juan Nicolas Ruiz: } Is there a way get the register on the LHS of a llvm instruction? (in } case there is one) } } for example, given a "free %reg773", I want to find the matching } "%something = malloc %", where %something is not necessarily %reg773. } One way I found was to inmediately follow the use-def chain up from } the free to the malloc. But instead, I

without tabs Lauro 2006/12/20, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com>: > > Hi Lauro, > > Just a stylistic remark; In your "llvm.patch" file, there are tabs in > these lines: > > + if (GV->hasExternalWeakLinkage()) { > + ExtWeakSymbols.insert(GV); > + } > > Others will need to review the patch for correctness, though. >

On 22/09/05, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Couldn't you state the explicit namespaces. So not using "using > namespace llvm" and instead prefix all calls with "llvm::"? The header files in boost do not use fully-qualified tie(). I probably should not modify them. But my .cpp file #include them. I hope I could "using namespace" boost

On 9/25/07, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/25/07, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > On 9/24/07, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > > > > > Weird. I see a potential problem, though. The code is like this: > > > > > >

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Then that flow would be explicit in the CFG, right? Then %F wouldn't > be dead, I'm assuming. Right. That's why I used a conditional branch after the intrinsic, but it sounds like the CFG simplification pass after lowering will optimize it away and no longer have the flow explicit. (To the

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex L" <arphaman at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Anton Korobeynikov" <anton at korobeynikov.info>, "Bill Wendling" <isanbard at gmail.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing > List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:17:16

Thanks Bill! But it does not work. I get the error given below when I try to load LLVMExecutionEngine.o in the opt command. Error opening '../../../build/Release/lib/LLVMExecutionEngine.o': ../../../build/Release/lib/LLVMExecutionEngine.o: only ET_DYN and ET_EXEC can be loaded -load request ignored. Any ideas?? Please help me out here. Thanks, Bhavani --- On Sun, 10/26/08, Bill

That depends on what you call a false positive. The public buildbot regularly fails because of mailing Frontend tests, and I have had continues failures of some DejaGNU tests for a long time on some builders. Its not a false positive per se, but one starts to ignore the failures because they aren't unexpected. - Daniel On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Bill Wendling<isanbard at

Are us on Mac OSX or GNU Darwin without apple OS... I am trying to get it going on OpenBSD 3.8/3.9 latest but seems that the compiler boffs on this system... Should I send the configure output-- could anybody maybe have a hint about why its blowing up...? regards, Joseph Altea Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: Hi Tanya, Attached are the "make check" results from

FYI: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-October/066389.html Please read and let me know you comments. -bw On Oct 11, 2013, at 2:47 PM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: > Looking forward to these changes! Thanks for working on it. > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > I

Yes, this is me. I'll look at this tonight when I have access to a machine. Evan On Jan 27, 2008, at 1:01 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > In the last few days, some change introduced an internal compiler > error. On my G4 (PPC), I'm getting this: > > $ cat testcase.i > struct A {}; > struct B { > struct A c[0]; > };

Looking forward to these changes! Thanks for working on it. On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > I can try my best, but it would be a bit tricky to get it all finished by > then... > > -bw > > On Oct 11, 2013, at 4:10 AM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: > > Bill, > > Are there

FYI, I have been maintaining my own release_31 manually on github.com/chapuni. 2012/5/1 Sebastian Pop <spop at codeaurora.org>: > Hi Anton, > > git-svn got confused at the branch point for the release_31: I see > that the current release_31 branch has been created on r155051 as a > copy of r155050 from trunk, and r155050 is actually removing an older > release_31 branch:

Hi Anton, git-svn got confused at the branch point for the release_31: I see that the current release_31 branch has been created on r155051 as a copy of r155050 from trunk, and r155050 is actually removing an older release_31 branch: Revision 155050 Author: void Date: Wed Apr 18 16:38:33 2012 CDT (11 days, 20 hours ago) Log Message: Removing old release_31 branch for rebranching. This

The ARM binaries seem to be corrupt. Although correctly signed, the xz file seems to be truncated arm7% unxz < clang+llvm-3.5.0-rc3-armv7a-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz | wc -c unxz: (stdin): Unexpected end of input 133214381 M.E.O. On Aug 21, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Ahem. And now for the correct URL: > >

On 6/28/19 5:35 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:53 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com<mailto:isanbard at gmail.com>> wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:48 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com<mailto:jyknight at google.com>> wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:00 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com<mailto:isanbard at

Hi, The add.with.overflow instrinsics don't seem to work with constant arguments, i.e. changing the call in add-with-overflow.ll to: %t = call {i32, i1} @llvm.sadd.with.overflow.i32(i32 0, i32 0) causes the following exception when running the codegen tests: llc: DAGCombiner.cpp:646: void<unnamed>::DAGCombiner::Run(llvm::CombineLevel): Assertion `N->getValueType(0) ==

> > No. I think that you might want to use Clang for inspiration on design, > but you'd certainly not be bound to that. If you'd like to take a much more > start-from-scratch approach, you can also look at the code that Bill put > together: https://github.com/isanbard/flang - If you use that as a base, > we can always merge it with the useful lfort pieces later. Ok,

On 9/25/07, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On 9/24/07, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > > > Weird. I see a potential problem, though. The code is like this: > > > > void dumpToDOUT(SparseBitVector<> *bitmap) { > > dump(*bitmap, DOUT); > > } >