similar to: [LLVMdev] Bug submission instructions

Ever thought of using something like bugzilla? -Tanya On Wed, 21 May 2003, Chris Lattner wrote: > > FYI: I just posted a short document with instructions on how to submit a > proper bug report. If you run into problems using LLVM, please let us > know. The instructions indicate steps to properly narrow down the bug, > which will make life easier for the bug-fixer. :) > >

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Patrick Meredith wrote: > What's different about code that's been mem2reg'd from straight front end > code, or anything that mem2reg hasn't been run on? PHINODES! Yup, front-ends generally don't produce SSA form. :) > It appears to be crashing when I try to cast a Value* that's really a > BB* (from the PHInode operands) to a User*,

Somehow it fails with operand out of bounds when the number of operands is 2 and I am asking for the second operand. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Lattner" <sabre at nondot.org> To: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 4:24 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] weird issue with mem2reg, should have guessed > On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Patrick Meredith

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Patrick Meredith wrote: > Somehow it fails with operand out of bounds when the number of operands > is 2 and I am asking for the second operand. Second meaning operand 1. Okay, so you have something like this: if (CallInst *CI = dyn_cast<CallInst>(...)) { ... = CI->getOperand(1); } Can you send in this snippet of code, the assertion, and the

On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 03:50:09PM -0500, Patrick Meredith wrote: > MetaSplit is an anlysis I just finished writing. It doesn't alter > anything, all it does is build a set of "program instructions". For > some reason even though if I run it with any other combination of > passes I've found, anytime I run it with mem2reg I get a seg fault in > dyn_cast!

void MetaSplit::handleProgramUses(Value *V){ if(!isa<BasicBlock>(V)) programValues.insert(V); if(User *U = dyn_cast<User>(V)){ User::op_iterator OB = U->op_begin(), OE = U->op_end(); for(; OB != OE; ++OB){ if(CallInst *CI = dyn_cast<CallInst>(*OB)){ Function *F = CI->getCalledFunction(); if(F == ii || F == fi || F == vi || F == di || F == ci

What's different about code that's been mem2reg'd from straight front end code, or anything that mem2reg hasn't been run on? PHINODES! It appears to be crashing when I try to cast a Value* that's really a BB* (from the PHInode operands) to a User*, insteresting since I am dyn_casting. I just caught this on cerr though (printing out what the Value* was each time). Let me

On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 05:15:30PM -0700, John Cortes wrote: > If I use any of the regalloc parameters (local, ...) I get an error in > the LiveVariable.cpp file, in the part that I think cheaks for dead > code because a Variable didn't have a defined Instance to a Machine > instruction. > > " llc: LiveVariables.cpp:86: void >

Chris, I'm a little confused. I am experiencing a crash when compiling the llvm-gcc frontend. According to the bugpoint documentation, bugpoint is used to debug "optimizer crashes, miscompilations by optimizers, or bad native code generation," which seems like it implies that the frontend compiles. Also, the http://llvm.org/docs/HowToSubmitABug.html documentation seems to

Dear All, Given a pointer to an instruction, what is the easiest way to insert one or more new instructions after that instructions? We used to find the next instruction using Instruction::getNext(), but this method seems to have been made private now. -- John T.

This didn't work as I tried with 197.parser. it works without "-Wl,-disable-opt" switch though. [197.parser]$ llvm-gcc analyze-linkage.c and.c build-disjuncts.c extract-links.c fast-match.c idiom.c main.c massage.c parse.c post-process.c print.c prune.c read-dict.c utilities.c xalloc.c word-file.c strncasecmp.c -Wa,-disable-opt -Wl,-disable-opt -lm -o llvm_parser [197.parser]$

Ok, i'm having a problem with understanding the allocating of registers. I've written in the "addPassesToEmitAssembly()" the passes to create the assembly code, as in the PowerPC example. I'ved tried filling up as much of the code in <Target>RegisterInfo.cpp (Register/Frame code) to handle writing and reading from stack. The allocation method I used was

Hi Tanya and everybody, Ty for your support. I too believe it should not be complicated. But I was not being able to do it. For instance, I tried to run this code below: BB->push_back(&(BB->front())); BB->pop_front(); But it did not work (kinda obvious why). Nor this: BB->push_back(BB->begin()); BB->pop_front(); But also did not work. It seams the same

I've put the pre-release tar balls here: http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ I'm asking for help to test this release and to review documentation. If anyone can spare some time to help out, I would really appreciate it. The more people that test, the better this release will be. Secondly, now that the tarballs have been created, everyone is free to check in documentation changes into the

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Tanya Lattner wrote: > For testing, we would like a mix of people to do x86 and ppc. Please send > email to the list if you plan to test, what architecture, and if you will use > the llvm-gcc binary or compile it yourself. That way, I know who to expect > results from. I will test on Darwin/PPC, I'll try the precompiled llvmgcc, objdir != srcdir. -Chris

I'd like to tag and create the branch for llvm and llvm-test soon. Does anyone still have tests to XFAIL, warnings to fix, or other critical bug fixes? Please respond to this mail and let me know ASAP if you are done or need more time. -Tanya

I'll test on Darwin/PPC, precompiled llvmgcc, objdir == srcdir. Rob On Apr 16, 2006, at 1:42 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> For testing, we would like a mix of people to do x86 and ppc. >> Please send email to the list if you plan to test, what >> architecture, and if you will use the llvm-gcc binary or compile >> it

On 02/01/2010 01:13 PM, Kristaps Straupe wrote: > Hello again! > > We have fetched the latest llvm sources from repository and the > original problem has went away. Though now we are facing a new problem > with interpreter on the following c code: > > -------------- > #include <stdarg.h> > #include <stdio.h> > > void doTheThing(int dummy, ...) > {

Hi, where could one find any LLVM development roadmap for this and perhaps next year? Especially would be interesting to know about * planned features for PS3 Cell processor -- as well as for Wii, Xbox360 CPUs * multithreading in general * possibly coming changes in major versioning and related issues * other interesting featuring comments on current status to above listed items are also

After running through bugpoint, I get this reduced function You can reproduce the problem with: opt bugpoint-reduced-function.bc -break-crit-edges -adce -verify Bugpoint is currently trying to narrow down which block breaks this, but is so far failing. It seems to be running out of memory rather than failing on a particular block. This is on freebsd 5.4, X86, llvm is compiled with gcc 3.4.2