similar to: [LLVMdev] How to insert two instructions with the same name?

On Oct 8, 2006, at 1:15 AM, Zhou Sheng wrote: > i want to insert a PHI into one basicblock like this: > > %s.1 = phi int [ 80, %entry ], [ %tmp21, %bb17 ] > > then, insert a cast inst. into another basicblock like this: > > %s.1 = cast int %s.1 to uint > > But, when i do this, the llvm automatically change the same name > into a new one. > In SSA, any assignment

Hi, Seems pass scalar-evolution+indvars fail to get the loop trip count of the following case: int foo(int x, int y, int lam[256], int alp[256]) { int i; int z = y; for (i = 255; i >= 0; i--) { z += x; lam[i] = alp[i]; } return z; } The final optimized ll code is : define i32 @foo(i32 %x, i32 %y, i32* %lam, i32* %alp) nounwind { entry: br label %bb bb:

I found a case which gcc can compile while llvm-gcc can not. I'm using the gcc4.1 and the most recent llvm-gcc. Here is the case: template <int N> class T { public: int V; }; T<4> test(T<4> a[4][8]) { return a[3][3]; } llvm-gcc dumped: fail.cpp: In function \u2018T<4> test(T<4> (*)[8])\u2019: fail.cpp:7: error: invalid use of incomplete type

Hi, I have a simple C case as following: int test(int x, int y) { return -x / -y; } With llvm-gcc -O1, I got: define i32 @test(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind { entry: sub i32 0, %x ; <i32>:0 [#uses=1] sub i32 0, %y ; <i32>:1 [#uses=1] sdiv i32 %0, %1 ; <i32>:2 [#uses=1] ret i32 %2 } With llvm-gcc -O2, I got: define i32 @test(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind { entry: sdiv i32

Current llvm-gcc 4.2 building failed on X86-64, here is the dump information: xgcc -B/home/zsth/projects/llvm.org/build/cfe4.2obj/./prev-gcc/ -B/home/zsth/projects/llvm.org/install/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -I../../../cfe4.2/libcpp -I. -I../../../cfe4.2/libcpp/../include -I../../../cfe4.2/libcpp/include -DENABLE_LLVM -g -O2 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes

Hi, i used CVS to checkout the source of llvm and llvm-gcc, compiled and built them on my machine successfully. i tried a c-language hello program, it was OK. But when i tried a c++-language hello program, i got: ~/project/llvm/examples$ llvm-g++ t3.cc -o t3 gccld: /developer/zsth/project/llvm/src/llvm/lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraph.cpp:277: void

I am working on a transform that uses an scc_iterator on a program's CallGraph. However, I am running into a problem in which not all callees are being processed before callers, leading me to believe there might be a bug. In particular, this is happening in a case where a callee is a function pointer. I ran bugpoint and have included the bugpoint-reduced-simplified.ll below. If

Hello, I want to compile a LLVM file into an executable running on ARM platform. I use LLVM 2.0 with the following command lines: llvm-as -f -o test.bc test.ll llc -march=arm -mcpu=arm1136j-s -mattr=+v6 -f -o test.s test.bc arm-linux-gnu-as -mcpu=arm1136j-s test.s With the last command, I obtain the following error: rd and rm should be different in mul The bad instruction is

Hi, Here is C function: uint64_t mul(uint32_t x, uint32_t y) { return x * y; } current llvm-gcc-4.0 with -O3 will compile it to: define i64 @mul(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind { entry: %tmp3 = mul i32 %y, %x ; <i32> [#uses=1] %tmp34 = zext i32 %tmp3 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1] ret i64 %tmp34 } This seems incorrect. I think it should extend %x, %y to i64 first and

Here is the example code: class A { const int x[5]; public: //A() { x[0] = 1; x[1] = 1; x[2] = 2; x[3] = 3; x[4] = 4; } A():x((const int[5]){1,2,3,4,5}) {} int getV(int idx) { return x[idx];} }; //const int A::x[5] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 }; int main() { A a; return a.getV(1); } gcc 4.1.2 can compile the above code. llvm-gcc reports: x.cpp: In constructor \u2018A::A()\u2019: x.cpp:5:

Hi, I encountered a problem about volatile quantifier when using llvm-gcc, here is the example: #define N 10 int sum(volatile int a[N]) { int sum = 0; unsigned i = 0; for (i = 0; i < N; ++i) sum += a[i]; return sum; } If I compile it as C code, then llvm-gcc will dump: define i32 @sum(i32* nocapture %a) nounwind { bb1.thread: %0 = volatile load i32* %a, align 4

Hi Mikael, You are obtaining warning, not an error, right? The most arm cores, including arm1136, can execute mul with rd = rm. So, you can ignore this warning. Lauro 2007/6/12, Peltier, Mikael <m-peltier at ti.com>: > > > > > Hello, > > > > I want to compile a LLVM file into an executable running on ARM platform. > > I use LLVM 2.0 with the following

Hi, Thanks, John, I just forgot the multi-thread issue. I'll write my own pass to handle this as for my project, it is just single-thread case. Sheng. Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:30:45 -0500 > From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Eliminate Store-Load pair even the LoadInst is > volatile > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List

On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > I am working on a transform that uses an scc_iterator on a program's > CallGraph. However, I am running into a problem in which not all > callees are being processed before callers, leading me to believe there > might be a bug. In particular, this is happening in a case where a > callee is a function pointer. I ran bugpoint and

Hi Sheng Am Dienstag, 4. März 2008 schrieb Zhou Sheng: > Current llvm-gcc 4.2 building failed on X86-64, here is the dump I am not followng head closely but may it be that the current head still doesn't support amd64 proper: gcc README.LLVM: "When targeting non-darwin X86-64/AMD-64/EM64-T, configure with --disable-shared. The LLVM X86-64 backend doesn't support PIC codegen on

I printed the call graph as you suggested. The bugpoint bytecode that I sent below prints the following call graph: Indirect call node / | | \ / | | \ V | V V execute | prog_char clear_func | | V V push_constant | V Node0x8d7b370 i.e., Indirect call node -> execute

Hi, I'm following http://llvm.org/docs/SourceLevelDebugging.html#debugopt to do the dbgopt testing. But seems, there is something wrong with the Makefile, it told me : llvm-gcc sse.expandfft.c -g --emit-llvm -c -o Output/sse.expandfft.bc llvm-gcc: sse.expandfft.c: No such file or directory llvm-gcc: no input files Am I missing something, like the configure option? -------------- next part

> > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:23:52 -0700 > From: "Bill Wendling" <isanbard at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] A case where llvm created different cfg for > same code > To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Message-ID: > <16e5fdf90808121323g1ae2a2e3lb6c5bd62521df621 at mail.gmail.com> >

The following piece of IR is a fixed point for opt -std-compile-opts/-O3: --- target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-S128-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f16:16:16-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-f128:128:128-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-s0:64:64-f80:128:128-n8:16:32:64" target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" ; Function Attrs: nounwind readonly define i32 @get32Bits(i8*

This looks wrong to me, though the x86 backend produces code that does the right thing (reads each element once). If you change the code (see below) to read each element twice, llvm-gcc still does the right thing but llvm-g++ does not (i.e. it fails to read aech location twice). Current versions of gcc/g++ also look wrong. All 4 compilers (gcc,g++,llvm-gcc,llvm-g++) do the right thing when