similar to: [LLVMdev] cs326 mp help

Ah, I see that getAnalysisUsage has a const in its signature, so I was defining a whole new function, not overriding one. Fixing that took care of the problem. Sorry to bother! Nadir Kiyanclar kiyancla at uiuc.edu

Hi, First, sorry in advance for pasting code like this :) I'm doing a simple optimization pass for a cs326 class project. The pass in question is LICM, and I'm getting an assertion when I try to hoist an instruction. My hoist function is below. I dont think I need that copying in there, that was just something people on the newsgroup suggested. I get the same assertion

Hi, I'm current using LLVM 2.5 to JIT code in a event driven language running on a game engine. Haven't updated to 2.7 yet, but I do intend to. When checking for memory leaks I found that each time I was calling EE->runFunction after creating a stub function to execute an event, all the pass information was being repeatedly added to PMDataManager. I have changed addAnalysisImplsPair

I'm unfamiliar with the leak you've just described, but Jeffrey Yasskin has done a lot of work cleaning up leaks for 2.7 and trunk. I was just going to mention that unless the function you are calling via runFunction has a simple prototype that's special cased in runFunction, it will generate its own stub function for every call. If you don't want to worry about that, you can call

Hi Reid, I guess it's not so much a memory leak, as unexpected behaviour, resulting in excessive memory use. I also call the following after EE->runFunction, which seems to clean up pretty nicely. EE->freeMachineCodeForFunction(stub); // Delete functions and IR. stub->deleteBody(); stub->eraseFromParent(); Rob. -----Original Message----- From: reid.kleckner at

I have a large dataset similar to this: ID time result A 1 5 A 2 2 A 3 1 A 4 1 A 5 1 A 6 2 A 7 3 A 8 4 B 1 3 B 2 2 B 3 4 B 4 6 B 5 8 I need to extract a number of features for each individual in it (identified by "ID"). These are: * The lowest result (the nadir) * The time of the nadir - but if the nadir level is present at >1 time point, I need the minimum and maximum time of nadir

I Dears, if that wouldn't take u too much effort I'd like to ask for a swift opinion: I have a alinear (mixed effect) model that I wish to run as a piecewise one. When I predict the values Iget quite some odds and disturbing results: The predicted stright line after the break point is not straight at all, instead behaves like if it was a hig order polynomial or something similar!!!! I

Hi folks... check this out.. > GLU<-lme(gluc~rt*cd4+sex+age+rf+nadir+pharmac+factor(hcv)+factor(hbs)+ + haartd+hivdur+factor(arv), + random= ~rt|id, na.action=na.omit) > intervals(GLU)$fixed lower est. upper (Intercept) 67.3467070345 7.362307e+01 7.989944e+01 rt *0.0148050160* 6.249304e-02 1.101811e-01 cd4

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Alex Li wrote: > Hi Chris, > > Thanks for responding so quickly, here's the stack trace. Okay, try applying this patch to your llvm/lib/VMCore/Pass.cpp file. It seems to have been in CVS since February 9, I assume that your tarball predates that. If this doesn't fix it, I'm not sure that there is anything that I can do, as I don't have the files you

Hi > Right it does. However, does something *else* require MParSchedule? If > so, what? Ok, i am writing on a different backend based on the cbackend. The test usage of this pass looks like this: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>(); AU.addRequired<MParSchedule>(); AU.setPreservesAll(); } and then in the

Hi, I'm a cs326 student that uses LLVM for our MP. While some of the COOL program can be run seamlessly, I get the following assertion error for many of them. lli: Pass.cpp:95: bool llvm::FunctionPassManager::run(llvm::Function&): >> Assertion `(&F == mF) && "ModuleProvider does not contain this >> function!"' failed. >> >> It seems

Hi, I'm working on a CS326 compiler project, and I'm having some problems using string functions. Some LLVM programs produced are either aborting or giving incorrect results; however, if I disassemble the LLVM bytecode and recompile with GCC, everything works fine. I encountered the following error when running lli with '-force-interpreter' option: "Tried to execute an

I'm using the intrinsic llvm.memcpy which I declare at the top of my file: declare void %llvm.memcpy(sbyte*, sbyte*, uint, uint) and then later use as such: call void %llvm.memcpy(sbyte* %t12, sbyte* %t13, uint %t9, uint 0) However when trying to compile the llvm program I get this: cpp -I/home/class/cs326/mp/mp2/lib cgen_test.ll | sed -e"s/#.*//" > cgen_test.bc.exp llvm-as

I'm having trouble with using getAnalysis() to access the results of one pass from within another. I require the pass to be previously executed as follows: void MyPass::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &Info) const { Info.addRequired<TDDataStructures>(); } Then I try to use it as follows: bool MyPass::doInitialization(Module &M) { TDDataStructures &dsgraph =

Hi dears, I do > CHOL<-lme(chol~rt*cd4+sex+age+rf+nadir+pharmac+factor(hcv)+factor(hbs)+ haartd+hivdur+factor(arv), random= ~rt|id, na.action=na.omit) ...runs sweet,..then ....try a multicomparisons approach for the categorical rf > summary(glht(CHOL, linfct=mcp(rf="Tukey"))) * Error in model.frame.default(object, data, xlev = xlev) : l'oggetto non è una matrice

[OT ALERT] On 17/04/15 02:28, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > clamav is a scanner that is designed to detect viruses (virii I should use > for plural as it is Latin word) I believe this 'rule' in English is misunderstood by many and as a general rule of thumb... tl;dr: Words from Old English that came into modern English, use 'Old English' pluralisation: eg, sheep, fish etc. words

The only thing I can think of is that string.h is being #included and has different signatures for memcpy and strncpy. Possibly "char" is not signed on your machine (very unusual) or some of the parameters are declared as "const". Reid. On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 18:19, Eric Zimmerman wrote: > Chris, > > I'm fine with using JIT, but I'm trying to understand this

On Thu, April 16, 2015 8:59 pm, Peter Lawler wrote: > [OT ALERT] > > On 17/04/15 02:28, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > >> clamav is a scanner that is designed to detect viruses (virii I should >> use >> for plural as it is Latin word) > I believe this 'rule' in English is misunderstood by many and as a > general rule of thumb... > tl;dr: > Words from Old

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > The only thing I can think of is that string.h is being #included and > has different signatures for memcpy and strncpy. Possibly "char" is not > signed on your machine (very unusual) or some of the parameters are > declared as "const". The problem is that the code generated by the C backend cannot include any system

Chris, I'm fine with using JIT, but I'm trying to understand this problem: 1. My LLVM program does not produce correct results 2. Using llvm-dis, I disassemble the bytecode to C 3. I recompile using GCC and the program _works correctly_. The only odd thing is when I recompile with GCC, I see these messages: pal3.c:195: warning: conflicting types for built-in function `strcmp'