similar to: [LLVMdev] RE: Question about Global Variable

Hi, Sorry for bothering you guys again. I got problem when I am trying to recover the Global Variable Initial value. What I did is like the following ConstantArray *Cstr = dyn_cast<ConstantArray>(gI->getInitializer()); // the above instruction enable me to get the content of initial string of global variable, like char a[10] ="test global"; And then I make some change for

Hi, I got a problem when I am trying to insert a call function with pointer arguments. The function C proto-type is the following, void stat_func(char *); >ConstantArray *Cstr = dyn_cast<ConstantArray>(gI->getInitializer()); ...... >Function *exFunc = M->getOrInsertFunction("stat_func", Type::VoidTy, PointerType::get(Type::SByteTy),0); >std::vector<Value*>

Hi, We noticed a dramatic slowness when writing to a gluster disk when compared to writing to an NFS disk. Specifically when using dd (data duplicator) to write a 4.3 GB file of zeros: * on NFS disk (/home): 9.5 Gb/s * on gluster disk (/gdata): 508 Mb/s The gluser disk is 2 bricks joined together, no replication or anything else. The hardware is (literally) the same: * one server with

Howdy, I am having a problem with a library compiled from some legacy fortran code. I can call the library, it runs as it should, returns a list, and gives a ">" prompt, but then locks up the R session. Functions typed in return nothing. ctrl-c results in a new prompt that is still locked up, and R overwhelms the processor. This happens on Mac, Windows, and Linux exactly the same. I

Hello, I have a problem of generating a load instruction. The LLVM bytecode is: ------------------------ entry: ... %2 = call i32 (...)* @atoi(i8*%1) nounwind /*<- Insertpos*/ ... -- bb1: .. %5 = icmp sgt i32 %2, %i.0 ... ----------------- Now I have pb: pointer to the Value object of *%2* of bb1. Here, I want to generate a load instruction and I did it as: new LoadInst(pb,

Andy, I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it does something like this: // Move the instruction to its new location in the instruction stream. MachineInstr *MI = SU->getInstr(); if (IsTopNode) {

On Aug 28, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think > I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... > > So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it > does something like this: > > // Move the instruction to its new

Hi , I am using LLVM for my Post Graduate course project on Optimization. I am trying to do some insrtumentation to the bytecode.I 've been going through your Instrumentation code for the past few days in /llvm/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation folder and finally found two ways of instrumentation : 1) injecting LLVM bytecode instructions 2) calling an external C function. I am trying both and

On Dec 2, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Evan Cheng wrote: > There have been quite a bit of discussions about adding machine instruction bundle to support VLIW targets. I have been pondering what the right representation should be and what kind of impact it might have on the LLVM code generator. I believe I have a fairly good plan now and would like to share with the LLVM community. Let me add some

Andy, Lang, Thanks for the suggestion. I have spent more time with it today, and I do see some strange things in liveness update. I am not at the actual cause yet, but here is what I got so far: I have the following live ranges when I start scheduling a region: R2 = [0B,48r:0)[352r,416r:5)... R3 = [0B,48r:0)[368r,416r:5)... R4 = [0B,32r:0)[384r,416r:4)... R5 = [0B,32r:0)[400r,416r:4)...

Zheng Wang <jason.wangz at gmail.com> writes: > I have a problem of generating a load instruction. The LLVM bytecode is: > > ------------------------ > entry: > ... > %2 = call i32 (...)* @atoi(i8*%1) nounwind > /*<- Insertpos*/ > ... > > -- > bb1: > .. > %5 = icmp sgt i32 %2, %i.0 > ... > ----------------- > > > Now I have >

Hi, I want to access an array in my instrumentation code. For example: GlobalVariable: int *counter; //counter the number of load/store operations in run-time int *counterArray; //record the load/store addresses //increase the counter if a load/store is performed std::vector<Constant *>index(2); index[0] = Constant::getNullvalue(Type:getInt32Ty(Context)); index[1] =

Hi Sergei, Andy, Sorry - I got distracted with some other work. I'm looking into this and PR13719 now. I'll let you know what I find out. Sergei - thanks very much for the investigation. That should help me pin this down. Cheers, Lang. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Andy, Lang, > > Thanks for the suggestion. >

--- generator/rust.ml | 461 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 311 insertions(+), 150 deletions(-) diff --git a/generator/rust.ml b/generator/rust.ml index 79e16dfc6..ee65b1073 100644 --- a/generator/rust.ml +++ b/generator/rust.ml @@ -61,14 +61,16 @@ let generate_rust () = pr " use std::collections; use std::convert; +use std::convert::TryFrom; use

Hi Lang, Just one more quick question. in LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp In SlotIndex findLastUseBefore(unsigned Reg, SlotIndex OldIdx) Did you really mean to use for (MachineRegisterInfo::use_nodbg_iterator UI = MRI.use_nodbg_begin(Reg), UE = MRI.use_nodbg_end(); UI != UE; UI.skipInstruction()) {} Aren't we currently dealing with units,

Hi Tan Guangming, > I want to access an array in my instrumentation code. For example: > > GlobalVariable: > int *counter; //counter the number of load/store operations in run-time > int *counterArray; //record the load/store addresses strictly speaking these are not arrays, they are pointers. Also, you have written them in some kind of C-style idiom. What are the declarations

>> Attached. This makes the last change set compatible with the new >> hand-written lexer—a whole one line change! >> >> See the readme file in the zip archive. Hi Gordon, here's some feedback: include/llvm/Support/StringPool.h (+124) lib/Support/StringPool.cpp (+52) A reference-counted string interning facility. Will be used by the next patch. This

FYI, I am building on alpine 3.10 and 3.11 I am getting this build[1] error. I think these header files of dovecot are not correct. Or are they? I changed line 35 in /usr/include/dovecot/str.h from str_append_max(str, cstr, max_len); to str_append_max(str, (const char *)cstr, max_len); [1] /usr/include/dovecot/str.h: In function 'void str_append_n(string_t*, const void*, size_t)':

Volodya, I think you may need to update your CFE and rebuild. I compiled the test using my local build and I didn't get the results you see below. I'm also very surprised to see this output. The first %tmp.11 should have been %tmp.1 .. not sure how it got corrupted. In any event, the attachment is obviously generated by code that runs quite differently because the virtual register names

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