similar to: [LLVMdev] Conflicting passes?

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:

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

On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 14:48 +0200, Silken Tiger wrote: > Hi > > Thanks for all your feedback. I just found the reason for the compile failure > for my analysis pass: I had to add my object to the namespace llvm instead of > anonymous. This took me some time since i was looking for an linking > failure... but as errors go i should have looked at the error message a >

Hi Thanks for all your feedback. I just found the reason for the compile failure for my analysis pass: I had to add my object to the namespace llvm instead of anonymous. This took me some time since i was looking for an linking failure... but as errors go i should have looked at the error message a little closer. So for all those trying to add an analysis path: * add the object name to 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: > > > >

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)) &&

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))

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 > >

Hi, A number of transforms are actually independent, so here's a partial fix. I updated the dependencies in a cluster of transforms: LowerSwitch, Mem2Reg, LowerSelect, LowerAllocations, UnifyFunctionExitNodes. The patch has been tested, but not extensively. PassManager doesn't complain, and the result of a test pass that requires all these (except for LowerAllocations) together works

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, 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, here's what I want: virtual bool run(Module &M){ // do stuff... for (Module::iterator I = M.begin(), E = M.end(); I != E; ++I){ if(! I->isExternal())

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 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. > >>

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

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

Hi Prashanth, On Mar 25, 2007, at 11:43 PM, Prashanth Radhakrishnan wrote: > 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

Hi, > On Wed, 3 May 2006, Domagoj D wrote: > > I thought so. However, it's not clear to me why "preservation" is > > required at all? > > That's just an optimization. The PassManager should be able to > > run passes with > > interdependencies by serializing them (for example in the order as they were > > added to the queue). > >

On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:48:16 -0500 Patrick Meredith <pmeredit at uiuc.edu> wrote: > > On Apr 12, 2006, at 10:23 PM, Simon Burton wrote: > > > > > Is it possible to get llvm to generate native machine code > > without using gcc and friends ? Do I use lli ? > > llc. llc --help lists all the options. it compiles llvm bytecode > files. It seems this