similar to: [LLVMdev] hoisting problem.

Hi, First, please send any replies to me separately, as I am not on the list. I'm trying to run a very simple LLVM pass as a start on a class project. It compiles fine, but I get a runtime assertion when running the pass. I'll paste the error and cpp file below, but basically I'm being told that I haven't specified a required pass. However, I've looked at some example

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

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

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

Hello, I'm trying to add a new instruction after a given instruction in a basic block. Until LLVM 3.7, I was using the following code: BB->getInstList().insertAfter(I, new_inst); [where both I and new_inst are Instruction*] In LLVM 3.8 however, the SymbolTableList was created as a wrapper over iplist. Could anyone please tell me how I can do the same type of insertion in LLVM 3.8?

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Simona Simona via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I'm trying to add a new instruction after a given instruction in a basic >> block. >> Until LLVM 3.7, I was using the following code:

Why not just use Instruction::insertAfter()? I->insertAfter(new_inst); On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Try incrementing the iterator before using. > > On Sep 5, 2016 10:26, "Simona Simona via llvm-dev" < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Daniel

Hi, Thank Brian Gaeke so much. Following TraceBasicBlocks.cpp, I modified the code as below and could insert instruction or function I need into anywhere in Module. But it works well without BB->getInstList().push_back(InstrCall), and if I add the BB->getInstList().push_back() following new CallInst(), I got error information when runing opt. What is the reason for it? And is it necessary

Hello all, I’m pretty new to LLVM. I'm writing a pass for loop optimization. I clone and rearrange loops, setting the cloned loop as the original loop’s parent. This can be done multiple times, until there is no more work to do. The trouble is, after the first time I do this, the cloned loop's SCEVs become unknown types when they should be AddRecExpr. If I re-run the whole pass on the

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

I am attempting to add instructions before and after all loops. To do this, I've added a simple function as follows: void addToAllLoops(Loop * IL) { addToAllLoops(IL); BasicBlock * PH = IL->getLoopPreheader(); Instruction *InstrCallPre = new CallInst(PrintLoopBegin, "", PH->getPrev()); return; } The function added is trivial: void

Hi llvm-devel, I have migrated my codebase from llvm-3.6 to llvm 3.8.1-stable. Although I was able to resolve most of the problems, I am facing issues resolving the following: To insert an instruction immediately after the first instruction within a basic block, I first get all instructions in my basic block in an instruction container list. Once that is done, I insert my new instruction in the

Hey everyone, So I have an LLVM pass that appears to run completely and work fine, and then it aborts at the very end. When exiting the final runOnFunction call, I get the following error / stack dump. I cannot figure out why this is happening for the life of me - does anyone have any ideas? I'm not trying to do any crazy deallocation or anything, it just seems like a normal pass to me.

Hi Griffin, did your pass create a data structure that holds values somehow, and forgot to delete it? Also, try running under valgrind in case this is due to a memory error of some kind. Ciao, Duncan. > So I have an LLVM pass that appears to run completely and work fine, and > then it aborts at the very end. When exiting the final runOnFunction call, > I get the following error /

2011/2/28 John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>: > On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In > particular, I want to > ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. > However > there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: >

Hello all, I really, really, really need your help. This is my third email now, please don't ignore me! I understand this must be a trivial thing, but I've ground to a halt, and REALLY need some guidance. Please see below for the context of my problem. I'm not trying to be a waste of time, but I'm desperate here. I have a getAnalysisUsage method which does the following

Hi Has anybody tell me how to create some new type qualifies in LVM? A type qualify, like "const" in C, is useful for program analysis. I hope that I can set/get the type qualify of any value in a program analysed. Or, if I could add a property to the value class and set/get the property, it is same to add some new type qualifies. So, I simply insert a "int" private

Griffin Wright wrote: > > Hello all, > > I really, really, really need your help. This is my third email now, > please don't ignore me! I understand this must be a trivial thing, but > I've ground to a halt, and REALLY need some guidance. Please see below for > the context of my problem. I'm not trying to be a waste of time, but I'm > desperate here.

Using Valgrind hasn't shown me anything terribly unusual. And I'm confused because its not even trying to delete a real instruction; deleting a void type with no name? That doesn't make any sense... Any other hints? I've seen a few posts in the past about this relating to some internal LLVM bugs... -Griffin On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:26:41 +0100, Duncan Sands <baldrick at

I've been digging into some undefined behaviour stemming from how ilist is typically configured. r247937, r247944, and r247978 caused a UBSan failure to start firing on our Green Dragon bots, and after an IRC conversation between David and Nick and Mehdi, we added a blacklist: -- $echo "src:$WORKSPACE/llvm/include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineFunction.h" >> sanitize.blacklist --