similar to: [LLVMdev] instruction sequence

This question is similar to Ryan Lefever's post on May 1, 2006 about printf declaration. In my case, I want to insert fprintf(stderr, ...) calls. I'm new to LLVM, and I don't know what's the recipe for putting together the arguments. Can someone give me basic instructions or point me in the direction on what to do? I can't find any more documentation on this. Thanks!

Ok, I think I figured it out. I talked to someone, and we figured out that when I make a call to printf with a constant string, I need to make a global variable and use getElementPtr to reference it. The modified call for accessing the printf is: /* m is Module*, f is Function*, i is Instruction* */ Constant* constStr = ConstantArray::get("test\n"); GlobalVariable* gv =

I am writing a pass where I need to make a function deceleration for printf. Below is the code I'm trying to use. ----- bool MyPass::runOnModule(Module &m) { vector<const Type*> args; args.push_back(PointerType::get(Type::SByteTy)); Function* f = m.getOrInsertFunction("printf", FunctionType::get(Type::IntTy, args, true)); ----- When I insert a call

On Thu, 2 Mar 2006, Chris Lattner wrote: >> Any ideas what could be wrong? > > Sorry for the delay, please try this tarball: > http://nondot.org/sabre/2006-03-02-llvm-gcc-4.tar.gz Actually, do to a recent change in CVS, this tarball will probably not work anymore. Please apply the attached (small) patch on top of it in the gcc directory. Worth noting, this front-end only works

Hi Misha, Thanks for your answer I was doing this: ======================== BasicBlock *BBlock = new BasicBlock("entry", MyFunc); ... Value *Zero = ConstantSInt::get(Type::IntTy, 0); Value *UZero = ConstantUInt::get(Type::UIntTy, 0); MallocInst* mi = new MallocInst( STyStru ); mi->setName("tmp.0"); BBlock->getInstList().push_back( mi );

Hi all, I was trying to implement an obfuscation tool for C-code on the basis of LLVM. I got a prototype of the simple obfuscation transformation which converting control flow graph to something like a state machine. I am not sure I will have time to work on extending further this tool with new transformations like opaque predicates and decided to put here source code I have by now with hope

Sorry for the delay Lee, I was out of town yesterday. In general it's better to send questions to the LLVMdev list... > hi. all i want to do now is make a new SetCondInst that i can replace > some old ones with, and it is turning out *impossible*. the first > parameter is the opcode, which is of class BinaryOps, which turns out to > be an enum i can't understand in

On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 19:47 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Paul wrote: > > I'm trying to pass an array pointer to my run-time generated module, and > > after a long time of searching for the answer, the only thing I got was > > a headache. Basically I have a few arrays (few megabytes which will > > sometimes be accessed as 8 / 16 / 32 / 64 bit

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, dummy1 at boxpl.com wrote: >> There are many possible ways to do this, can you be a bit more specific >> about what you're trying to do? > Here is a basic example: Ah, ok, I see what you're trying to do. Below is some *pseudo* code for the basic idea: > ============================================ > unsigned int buff[4096]; > > int main

Right now I am trying to capture the function name and the number of arguments , so this following is the pass I wrote . ------------------------------------------------------------- struct pass06a : public ModulePass { virtual bool runOnModule(Module &M) { std::vector<const Type*> pList; pList.push_back( PointerType::get(Type::SByteTy) ); pList.push_back(

I have llvm code that uses llvm::Type::UIntTy, llvm::Type::IntTy, and llvm::Type::SByteTy, but these are now removed. What should I use for their replacement. If I need to specify a size for IntTy and UIntTy, I want them to be the same size that an integer would be in C on the platform on which I'm compiling. So, if I need the sizes is their a way to fetch the size that an integer

Hi folks, I was just wondering if someone would be willing to tell me the best way to make a new structure type in LLVM and get it inserted as a valid type into a particular Module instance? I've done the following: vector<const Type*> types; types.push_back(Type::UIntTy); types.push_back(Type::UIntTy); structType = StructType::get(types); But

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

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Paul wrote: > I'm trying to pass an array pointer to my run-time generated module, and > after a long time of searching for the answer, the only thing I got was > a headache. Basically I have a few arrays (few megabytes which will > sometimes be accessed as 8 / 16 / 32 / 64 bit binary / fp values), that > will be modified by both the generated module, and my

I'm trying to pass an array pointer to my run-time generated module, and after a long time of searching for the answer, the only thing I got was a headache. Basically I have a few arrays (few megabytes which will sometimes be accessed as 8 / 16 / 32 / 64 bit binary / fp values), that will be modified by both the generated module, and my main c program, so I would like to put those into global

Hi all, I'm trying to print to screen the value read by the fread function. I'm at the point where source refers to the GetElementPtrInst ( pointer to the buffer where fread stored the data - %5 in my case ) and the fread() has been already called. I thought the correct approach to achieve what I need was: ExecutionContext& SF = ECStack.back(); GenericValue SRC =

Hi I am using LLVM to help me do some code analysis. I wrote a LLVM Function Pass to help me to generate some information. I use the code below to get the source line information for every instruction. for (BasicBlock &BB : F){ for(Instruction &I: BB){ DILocation* Loc = I.getDebugLoc().get(); unsigned Line = Loc->getLine() } } I think the function's first

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Yes, this makes a tremendous amount of sense. Do you think you could > prepare some patches to make this happen? If you have any questions, feel > free to ask :) Ok, a patch[1] is attached. I didn't care to coerce the offset, since I assume that it is an uint, but maybe I should? Hopefully I've understood the llvm source

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:25 AM Muhui Jiang via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi > > I am using LLVM to help me do some code analysis. I wrote a LLVM Function > Pass to help me to generate some information. I use the code below to get > the source line information for every instruction. > > for (BasicBlock &BB : F){ > for(Instruction &I:

Hi David Thank you very much for your suggestions. ScopeLine works well. It could represent the start of a function. Do you know whether I can get the start column of this function? Many Thanks Regards Muhui 2018-05-30 3:25 GMT+08:00 David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>: > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:25 AM Muhui Jiang via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>