similar to: [LLVMdev] ValueTy not set appropriately in Value.h?

Hello everyone, I am trying to "parse" a part of LLVM IR. More exactly, from @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [3 x i8] c"DS\00", section "llvm.metadata" I want to get "DS". It is the single place in the whole bytecode from where I can get it. I have : ... Value *VV = cast<Value>(LD100->getOperand(1)->getOperand(0));

Sorry, I have typo in my question. I will be careful next time. This is how I obtain the source operands of an instruction. // ----------------------------------------------------------------- BasicBlock::iterator it; ... for(int k=0; k<OpNum; k++){ errs()<<it->getOperand(k)<<" "; } ... // -------------------------------------------------------------------- Also I

Hi, > Sorry, I have typo in my question. > I will be careful next time. > > This is how I obtain the source operands of an instruction. > // ----------------------------------------------------------------- > BasicBlock::iterator it; > ... > for(int k=0; k<OpNum; k++){ > errs()<<it->getOperand(k)<<" "; try this:

Hi Nick, I have committed 0001 as r203788. I'm working on fixes for 0002 - 0014. > After reading through this patch series, I feel like I'm missing > something important. Where's the sort function? It looks like we're > still comparing all functions to all other functions. When you insert functions into std::set or its analogs it does all the job for you. Since

Nick Lewycky wrote: > > > > It's maintained by LLVM for you, by Value::setName and other methods. > > Nick > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > I am getting the following error when trying to

Hi all, I have a question regarding populating ValueSymbolTable of a Function. Is it that ValueSymbolTable is populated automatically whenever an alloca instruction is created using IRBuilder or do we need to explicitly populate?? If we need to populate explicitly, the insert method in ValueSymbolTable is private, so how can we do it? Currently, I am trying to access the symbol table as below:

subramanyam wrote: > > Hi all, > I have a question regarding populating ValueSymbolTable of a Function. > Is it that ValueSymbolTable is populated automatically whenever an alloca > instruction is created using IRBuilder or do we need to explicitly > populate?? It's maintained by LLVM for you, by Value::setName and other methods. Nick

Hi, For the following case, $ cat bad1.ll target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:64:128-a0:0:64-n32-S64" define internal void @test(i32 %v) { entry: %tmp = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 %v, i32* %tmp, align 4 %0 = bitcast i32* %tmp to <2 x i8>* %1 = load <2 x i8>* %0, align 4 ret void } I

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

Hi all, I can compile LLVM+clang (from svn 2.8 branch, fyi) just fine with gcc 4.4.5 and 4.5.1 on Linux/amd64 just fine, and I did successfully built LLVM+clang on Solaris10/amd64 (32bit built) just fine with gcc 3.3, too. However, when it comes to compiling my *own* project that builds atop of LLVM, I'm getting a strange compilation error when using GCC 4.5.1 but *NOT* when using GCC 4.4.5

On Nov 29, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) wrote: > C++ is such a complex language that no single naming convention will > be able to cover all cases. Therefore we aim at a reasonable default > that works for the majority of the cases. As Chris put at the > beginning of the coding standards, "no coding standards should be > regarded as absolute requirements to be

On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: >> I enjoyed the new coding style in recent patches. Camel case makes it easy >> to pick a descriptive name. Starting functions and variables with lower >> cases reduces chances to conflict with a type name. > Honestly speaking, I don't. Especially in the cases when varname is

Xia, LLVM doesn't really use type qualifiers the way you're thinking about it. In LLVM parlance, types are neither const nor non-const, they just define the fundamental nature of a value. However, LLVM fully supports Constant Values (see include/llvm/Constant.h) and constant global variables (see include/llvm/GlobalVariable.h). You might want to read up on the LLVM IR a bit here:

The freeze rwsem is taken by sb_start_intwrite() and dropped during the commit_ or end_transaction(). In the async case, that happens in a worker thread. Tell lockdep the calling thread is releasing ownership of the rwsem and the async thread is picking it up. Josef and I worked out a more complicated solution that made the async commit thread join and potentially get a later transaction, but

Launcher <st.liucheng at gmail.com> writes: > I am able to access the source operands of an instruction using either > getOperand() or op_iterator, However, I can't find any method available for > destination operand. Someone suggests that instruction itself can represent > the destination operand. > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-January/037518.html

Sure. I think we can change the GC lowering pass to recognize all llvm.gcroot (not only the ones in the first block), and move them to the first block so that they are initialized by the pass later on. On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:59 PM, nicolas geoffray < > nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote: > >>

Hi. I'm just starting to dig into the many existing llvm passes, and so far I didn't find what I'm looking for. I generate llvm IR code in debug. I'd just like to go through this code and remove as many temporaries as possible. Those variables look generated for debug purposes. They often look like synonyms of variables declared in the input source and don't seem to have a

I am able to access the source operands of an instruction using either getOperand() or op_iterator, However, I can't find any method available for destination operand. Someone suggests that instruction itself can represent the destination operand. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-January/037518.html The getOperand() returns an unsigned value like 0x9063498, while I can't

On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:59 PM, nicolas geoffray < nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Talin, > > You are not doing something wrong, it is just that the LLVM optimizers > consider llvm.gcroot like a regular function call. The alloca is moved in > the first block most probably because the inliner anticipates another > optimization pass (the mem2reg). > OK, well,

>The type you pass to GlobalVariable's constructor for that variable should be "[10 x %struct.dlist]" because that's what you want storage for. Then the GlobalVariable itself will be a Constant of type "[10 x %struct.dlist]*". Yes, I verified that this is the case. I enabled assertions and the error seems to occur while creating GlobalVariable for both struct dhash