similar to: [LLVMdev] How to get LoopInfo within Pass subclass?

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > Hi, I have a hopefully quick question. I'm writing a Pass that needs to > see a whole module at a time and keep some state, so I subclassed Pass. > However, I want to be able to see the Loops in each Function. Roughly, ok. > However, when running I'm informed that: > > PassManagerT.h:421: failed assertion

On Aug 5, 2004, at 5:30 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > >> Hi, I have a hopefully quick question. I'm writing a Pass that needs >> to >> see a whole module at a time and keep some state, so I subclassed >> Pass. >> However, I want to be able to see the Loops in each Function. Roughly, > > ok. > >>

On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > opt: /home/mmccrack/lens/obj-llvm-darcslocal/../llvm-darcslocal/llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManagerT.h:426: > void llvm::PassManagerT<UnitType>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, > llvm::Pass*) [with UnitType = llvm::Module]: Assertion > `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P) && > dynamic_cast<ImmutablePass*>(getAnalysisOrNullUp(P))

Hi all, Why are these two passes conflicting: UnifyFunctionExitNodes and LowerSwitch? AU.addRequired(LowerSwitchID) works, so does AU.addRequired<unifyFunctionExitNodes>(), but the two together don't... opt: PassManagerT.h:387: void llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Pass*) [with Trait = llvm::MTraits]: Assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P)

A On 3/21/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/21/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > > > > Hi, I'm trying to access an analysis pass from the Inliner pass, and > > > I'm having a lot of trouble getting that to work - I can verify that > >

On 3/21/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > > Hi, I'm trying to access an analysis pass from the Inliner pass, and > > I'm having a lot of trouble getting that to work - I can verify that > > my pass is loaded and run (it is a dynamically loaded pass that is > > part of an analysisgroup),

Hi > One would expect this, its a facility of the C++ language. The anonymous > namespace is, essentially, the same as declaring everything in it > static. That is, the symbols are not exported and not available for > linking. Yes, it was pretty clear after finding out that this isn't a linking error which i suspected... > > So for all those trying to add an analysis path:

Dear guys, I need help fixing a little piece of code. I have a pass that I really want to execute after the TwoAddressinstructionPass. But if I write "AU.addRequiredID(TwoAddressInstructionPassID);" in my pass' getAnalysisUsage, I end up getting the infamous: PassManagerT.h:387: failed assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P) &&

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > > You're right that FunctionPass's are not supposed to have state > > (something that many people overlook :) ), however, for now, nothing > > will break if it does have state, and this is really the only way > > around this. > > I'm not sure if I can do this. The pass I'm writing is writing info >

On Aug 5, 2004, at 8:11 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Sure, you can do that. Just use F->getParent() to get to the Module. D'oh. OK, so I can do what I need with a hack for now. >> Also, out of curiosity, why the stateless restriction - is it because >> passes may someday be run in parallel? > > Yup, exactly. That and we want to be able to make multiple instances

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 Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2006 19:21 schrieb Chris Lattner: > On Tue, 30 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > > Everthing now compiles fine, but when running llc with invoking my own > > backend derived from the cbackend i get the following error: > > namespace llvm { > > class MParSchedule : public BasicBlockPass { > > public: > > > >

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > On Aug 5, 2004, at 8:11 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Sure, you can do that. Just use F->getParent() to get to the Module. > > D'oh. OK, so I can do what I need with a hack for now. Ok. > > We have no problem with people asking questions. :) The PassManager > > is actually do for a rewrite. The current

On Aug 9, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> Well, I took a look at it a bit over the weekend. I am probably not >> the >> right person to do the complete rewrite, for instance reworking the >> Pass class hierarchy doesn't sound like something I'd want to do. Just >> getting to this point has been a bit of an education in real C++. > > Ok, fair

Dear guys, I have updated my LLVM to the top of CVS, and now I am getting errors like this one below when I write new passes: "llc: PassManagerT.h:387: void llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Pass*) [with Trait = llvm::FTraits]: Assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P) && dynamic_cast<ImmutablePass*>(getAnalysisOrNullUp(P)) &&

Hi, I have two function passes: AvailOut and HashGVN. AvailOut needs to use HashGVN. And they're built in the same shared object file. But addRequired<HashGVN> fails with this error: # opt -load ../../../build/Release/lib/LLVMGVN.so -hashgvn -availout --debug-pass=Structure <basic.s.bc >basic.out.bc opt: /proj/tbres/shanth/llvm/llvm-1.9/lib/VMCore/PassManagerT.h:387: void

Dear llvm guys, I am trying to add the BreakCriticalEdges pass to my application. I tried to add it to the PNE pass (e.g. PHIElimination.cpp - AU.addRequiredID(BreakCriticalEdgesID); ), but I get this error: llc -f -regalloc=simple Base1Sum.bc -o simple.s ----------------------------------------------- llc: PassManagerT.h:387: void llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const

On Wed, 31 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: >> that requires a BasicBlockPass, it will fail the same was as when a >> ModulePass requires a FunctionPass. > void MParSchedule::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { > AU.setPreservesAll(); > } > > MParSchedule requires nothing and changes nothing. So hopefully the above code > represents this fact? Right

OK, I noticed a few problems with my previous email, so I will boil the question down: What I want to do is compile for x86 and ia64 from darwin. I also want to load my own passes into opt and llc. Should I be using llvmc at all here, or should I be doing something like llvmgcc -> gccas -> opt -> llc ? I've given up on the filetype=obj argument, so now the problem is that llc is

Hi, I'm having some problems cross-compiling from ppc (OS X) to x86 object files and to ia64, at all. I'd appreciate some advice as to whether or not I'm actually supposed to be able to do this, and what's wrong if so. Here's how I configured it: ../llvm-darcslocal/llvm/configure --with-llvmgccdir=$LLVMGCCDIR --prefix=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/install The results work fine