similar to: [LLVMdev] Value* as used by the non-JITted interpreter

I'm trying to turn some GenericValues into Constants in the interpreter using code like this, in a switch statement: case Type::IntTyID: SI = ConstantSInt::get(FB->getType(), ArgVals[i].IntVal); params.push_back(UI); UI->dump(); //for testing break; FB is a Function::ArgumentListType::iterator ArgVals is a std::vector<GenericValue> the switch

I believe the correct way is actually include the Interpreter’s header and the rest is handled automatically. Should be similar for MCJIT Zhang > On 11 May 2018, at 05:21, Aaron via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Ok. I figured out. Following methods needs to be called. That fixed the issue. > > llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); >

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 Alberto, Can you please file a bug for it, with the test case attached (if you haven't already). Thanks, Ehud. On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 11:32 Alberto Barbaro via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi all, > just a gentle reminder :) Is there any update on this please? > > Happy to help in any way I can > > Alberto > > Il giorno ven 3 gen 2020 alle

Hello, Thank you for your answer. If I want to use then I have error: ‘NodeTy* llvm::ilist_half_node<NodeTy>::getPrev() [with NodeTy = llvm::Instruction]’ is protected error: ‘llvm::ilist_half_node<llvm::Instruction>’ is not an accessible base of ‘llvm::Instruction’ Do you know any other method to access the previous instruction of a terminator instruction? PS: back() is not an

Hello John, I was following your procedures and I isolated the problem. The problem are represented by the basic blocks with only one element. for (Function::iterator II = F.begin(), EE = F.end(); II != EE; ++II, ++ii) { BasicBlock* BB=II; if (BB->getTerminator()) { Instruction* current = BB->getTerminator(); Instruction* previous;

Ok. I figured out. Following methods needs to be called. That fixed the issue. llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); LLVMInitializeNativeAsmPrinter(); LLVMInitializeNativeAsmParser(); LLVMLinkInMCJIT(); Aaron On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 8:33 PM, Aaron <acraft at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > When I try to create execution engine I do get "*Interpreter has not been > linked

Hello, When I try to create execution engine I do get "*Interpreter has not been linked in.*" error and EngineBuilder returns NULL. Here is the line I use to create execution engine: auto executionEngine = llvm::EngineBuilder(std::move(m_module)).setErrorStr(&error).create(); Here are all headers I have included: #include "llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h" #include

I am attempting to add instructions before and after all loops. To do this, I've added a simple function as follows: void addToAllLoops(Loop * IL) { addToAllLoops(IL); BasicBlock * PH = IL->getLoopPreheader(); Instruction *InstrCallPre = new CallInst(PrintLoopBegin, "", PH->getPrev()); return; } The function added is trivial: void

I may be mistaken as I just took a quick look, but in ilist_node the function "getPrevNode()" actually calls a method on the previous node: NodeTy *getPrevNode() { NodeTy *Prev = this->getPrev(); // Check for sentinel. if (!Prev->getNext()) return 0; return Prev; } http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/ilist__node_8h_source.html#l00058 Try checking if

getPrevNode<http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1ilist__node.html#a77b897207ef0a1ae95c404695aed9a4b>() Get the previous node, or 0 for the list head. I don't see any method like hasPrevNode. It can be a weird problem because "current->getPrevNode()" is indicating to "current" itself (the problem appears for the BB with only one element)? On Thu, Dec

I solved by checking if(BB->size()>1) Thank you all for the help ! Now debugging the next segfault. On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu < alexandruionutdiaconescu at gmail.com> wrote: > getPrevNode<http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1ilist__node.html#a77b897207ef0a1ae95c404695aed9a4b>() > Get the previous node, or 0 for the list

On 8/4/15 11:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote: > void bpf_store_half(void *skb, int off, int val) > asm("llvm.bpf.store.half"); > int func() > { > bpf_store_half(0, 0, 0); > return 0; > } > > Compiled with: > > $ clang -g -target bpf -O2 -S -c test.c > > And get this: > > .text > .globl func > .align

Hi all! I gave a shot at compiling core llvm with a Solaris 9 machine. The compiler is FSF gcc 3.4.6. I am building trunk in the release version. So far I did not run tests (no dejagnu installed). Here are my findings: 0) Configuring. I had to suppress the solaris tools by: env AR=/opt/gnu/bin/ar NM=/opt/gnu/bin/nm RANLIB=/opt/gnu/bin/ranlib STRIP=/opt/gnu/bin/strip ../llvm/configure

Hello, I can see the occurrences of several LLVM intrinsic functions in the LLVM IR generated by llvm-dis disassembler. Is there any means to rewrite these functions reliably using basic LLVM IR statements? -- Thanks & Regards, Dipanjan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, Op 19-mei-07, om 00:39 heeft Chris Lattner het volgende geschreven: > Anton is right. You should be able to use -fno-builtins to disable > this. Thanks, that did the trick. Some final remarks (my app works again :-)): * llvm.va_start and similar intrinsics now have an i8* arg instead of an sbyte** * For some reason the Arguments of a Function are now circularly linked,

Michael, I have rework the patch according to your suggestion. And I have read binutil/objdump source code and found that it has a logic that if there's no symtab, it will use dynsym, which is missing in llvm-objdump. Songmao -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0002-Fix-the-address-calculation-for-llvm-objdump.patch Type: text/x-patch

On 2008-09-05, at 23:26, Jon Harrop wrote: > I'm having another play with LLVM using the OCaml bindings for a > forthcoming > OCaml Journal article and I have a couple of remarks: > > Firstly, I noticed that the execute engine is very slow, taking > milliseconds to call a JIT compiled function. Is this an inherent > overhead or am I calling it incorrectly or is this

On Sat, 19 May 2007, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> * It seems that a C-call like printf("---\n") is transformed to puts >> ("---") in the LLVM IR instead of keeping it a printf. What are the >> circumstances in which this happens? Do other similar conversions >> occur? Can this be turned off (lower optimisation level?)? Manually >> replacing the

> > Hey Lang - does any of this look familiar to you? I'm afraid not: I know nothing about the interpreter. As far as I'm aware it's essentially abandonware. Alberto: The usual recommendation in these circumstances is to use a JIT class instead of the interpreter. You're using -force-interpreter though, so I assume you really want to use the interpreter for your use case?