similar to: [LLVMdev] documentation bug

Hi, I'm having a problem with opt. According to the "Writing an LLVM Pass" tutorial, all I have to do to get the Hello pass to work is: cd ${LLVM_HOME}/llvm/lib/Transforms/Hello gmake cd $MYTEST opt -load ${OBJ_ROOT}/lib/Release/libhello.so -hello < something.bc > /dev/null First (just as a friendly reminder), someone may want to go back and double check a bunch of

hi, does someone consider parallel compiler using llvm? yueqiang 2003/12/25

Hi, I met some errors when I tried to build LLVM. The tar file is llvm-1.3.tar.gz. I am using a sparc machine with gcc 3.2.2. ------------- Compiling SparcV9CodeEmitter.cpp /uf24/zhou/research/llvm/src/lib/Target/SparcV9/SparcV9CodeEmitter.cpp: In static member function `static void llvm::<unnamed>::JITResolver::CompilationCallback()':

> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 06:05:16PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:04, Chris Lattner wrote: > > llvmcd - llvm compiler driver > > llvmci - llvm compiler invoker > > llvmcs - llvm compiler system (or perhaps "compilation system") > > llvmct - llvm compiler tool > > llvmx - llvm eXecutive > > I like llvmcs. Contrary

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 12:26:50PM -0500, Brian Gaeke wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 06:05:16PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > > > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:04, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > llvmcd - llvm compiler driver > > > llvmci - llvm compiler invoker > > > llvmcs - llvm compiler system (or perhaps "compilation system") > > > llvmct

Actually, Misha, that won't work. The -C option is used directly in docs/Makefile. So the change will have to go into docs/Makefile. Either that or upgrade install to version 5. Reid. On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 11:33, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 01:21:20PM -0600, Feng Chen wrote: > > llvm[1]: Installing HTML documentation > >

Constant *strcon==ConstantArray::get("Value : %d\n"); Sorry Typo. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 03:45:33PM -0700, Sriraman Tallam wrote: > > I have this call instruction to printf inserted which is causing > > an assertion failure. Any pointers to where I am wrong : > > > > Function

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!

Thanks Misha. I tried the "gcc -dM -E /tmp/file.c | grep __sparcv9" but there was no output. Maybe this is the probelm, I do have CXX = g++ -mcpu=v9 CC := gcc -mcpu=v9 in the Makefile.config. Do I need to add -m64 as well? Thanks. Shukang On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > Is your compiler configured to define __sparcv9 when it compiles? > The following should tell

Hello! I am having trouble with identifiers: %tmpFunction = load int ()** %puts_kernelPTR ... %tmpFunction = load int ()** %puts_kernelPTR generates Redefinition of value named 'tmpFunction' in the 'int () *' type plane! Is it not allowed to reuse variables? Is there some way to do it? Anders ---------------------------------------------------------------- Anders

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 06:44:50PM -0400, Shukang Zhou wrote: > I met some errors when I tried to build LLVM. The tar file is > llvm-1.3.tar.gz. I am using a sparc machine with gcc 3.2.2. > > ------------- > Compiling SparcV9CodeEmitter.cpp > /uf24/zhou/research/llvm/src/lib/Target/SparcV9/SparcV9CodeEmitter.cpp: In > static member function `static void >

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:52:28 -0700 Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 08:07, Jeff Cohen wrote: > > OK. I've built the front end without any heartaches, but I did > > encountered the following glitches: > > > > The documentation of --with-llvmgccdir is a bit ambiguous. I had to > > try several paths

On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:39:27AM -0800, Reid Spencer wrote: > Actually, Misha, that won't work. Sorry, Reid, but I think it will, for the following reason: I don't really know what the -c (lowercase) option does, but install says it's ignored anyway, so that's irrelevant for GNU install. We're talking about the -C option (uppercase). > The -C option is used directly

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*,

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:38:44AM -0700, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Here's the patch to Signals.cpp. assuming that stdio.h is acceptable > (can't imagine it won't work). We prefer #include <cstdio>, since this is C++ after all. :) -- Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu

Here's the patch to Signals.cpp. assuming that stdio.h is acceptable (can't imagine it won't work). On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:29:05 -0700 Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> wrote: > Uh... this may be a silly question, but why can't you include <stdio.h>? > It'd be much better than <iostream>. > > Anyway, I think I'll try this weekend to come

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 03:01:01PM -0500, Anshu Dasgupta wrote: > ><snip> > >for (BasicBlock::iterator I = Dest->begin(); PHINode *PN = > >dyn_cast<PHINode>(I); ++I) > > visitPHINode(*PN); > ><snip> > > > >build_vc71\lib\Transforms\Scalar\SCCP.cpp(202) : error C2275: > >'llvm::PHINode' : illegal use of this type as

I'm CC'ing the llvm-dev list because other people are more knowledgeable about the bytecode format/encoding than I am. Please follow-up the replies to the list. On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:27:53AM -0700, Yiping Fan wrote: > We also want to extend the llvm instructions/intrinsic > functions/types/passes to support our high-level synthesis for > hardware. First of all, we want to

On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:16:12PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > So I propose: > [snip] > -O3 = aggressive optimization, regardless of computation time with the > effect of producing the fastest executable I would suggest splitting -O3 into 2 or more levels of optimization, because as written, -O3 sounds pretty scary: "regardless of computation time", and given some

On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 04:15:49PM -0700, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I don't know if it's under cvs. It's the "getting started" page > (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GettingStarted.html) in section "Getting > Started Quickly (A Summary)". But careful reading of the remainder of > the page does give the correct path. http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/* is a copy of