similar to: [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] a question about type conversion propagation and elimination

I would like to be able to instrument va_arg, but when I generate a bc file for a test case using: llvm-gcc -O3 -emit-llvm vararg.c -c -o vararg.bc I do not see va_arg. Instead, it seems the args are accessed through %struct.__va_list_tag, which makes things a bit trickier to instrument. Is there a way to force llvm-gcc to use va_arg? Perhaps there is some documentation about va_list_tag or

The Samba ports are not filtered. The firewall is between STG-DC and SAMBADC (both of them sync correctly). The sync problems happen in VIG-DC3, which is behind the same firewall of STG-DC. Here's nmap output (SAMBADC is 172.16.50.9): root at vig-dc3:~# nmap -Pn 172.16.50.9 Starting Nmap 7.93 ( https://nmap.org ) at 2024-05-23 08:22 UTC Nmap scan report for SAMBADC.ugt.ldap (172.16.50.9)

As a results of my investigations, the thread is also added to cfe-dev. The context : while porting my company code from the LLVM/Clang releases 3.1 to 3.2, I stumbled on a code size and performance regression. The testcase is : $ cat test.c #include <stdint.h> struct R { uint16_t a; uint16_t b; }; volatile struct R * const addr = (volatile struct R *) 416; void test(uint16_t a) {

Hi All, Using clang+llvm at head, I noticed a weird behaviour with the following reduced testcase : $ cat test.c #include <stdint.h> struct R { uint16_t a; uint16_t b; }; volatile struct R * const addr = (volatile struct R *) 416; void test(uint16_t a) { struct R r = { a, 1 }; *addr = r; } $ clang -O2 -o - -emit-llvm -S -c test.c ; ModuleID = 'test.c' target

Hello. :) I've met a problem that eliminates a live code in code generation phase. The initially generated code is shown as follows (as a pseudo code): ( Before pseudo-code expansion. ) ---------- loop: : : set P0 <- xxx ( P0: a physical register for a parameter of function F ) set P1 <- yyy ( P1: a physical register for a parameter of function F ) SELECT_CC z1, z2, z3, ...

Hi Chris, > Icmp sgt is correct. while ugt would be wrong, I think sgt is too! For example, suppose %buf is 0 and %bufLen is ~0U. Then %add.ptr is ~0U, and %cmp is true, so control branches to %if.then. However in the optimized version %cmp is false and control branches to %if.end. The GEP does have an inbounds attribute, I'm not sure if that is relevant here. Ciao, Duncan. Note

Hi, everybody! I have been using samab on Debian for years and I have recently migrated my file server from version 3.0.14a-3sarge2 to 3.0.24-6etch4. One or our applications stores its data in a shared folder. This data is distributed in over 29000 files of about 1k-40k and is so much slower when it runs on the new server. I have thoroughly revised both smb.conf files, but can't see

Icmp sgt is correct. Note that "ugt x, 0" is the same as "x != 0" which is not what you want. -Chris On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Jonas Gefele <llvm.org at schrieb.de> wrote: > Hello, > > while writing a new LLVM backend I have observed that in some cases the > optimizer produces an "icmp sgt i32 %a, 0" where I would have expected an >

Hi, everybody! I am having certain problems accessing my Samba domain. I have set up several XP SP2 clients to access a Samba 3.0.10 PDC running on a Debian testing server. Problem #1: Suddenly, the domain stopped working: it could not even be accessed browsing the network. After some investigation, I found that nobody could connect to the shares or log on to the domain, except one of the

hume npx <humeafo at gmail.com> writes: > *hi,Óscar:* > * > * > *so following patch should address both the relocation problem and > uninstall tree problem, not fully tested just for discussion.* > * > * > Index: LLVMConfig.cmake.in > =================================================================== > --- LLVMConfig.cmake.in (revision 159425) > +++

While looking at what llvm writes for this testcase, I noticed that there is one redundant operation in resulting assembly. The second 'cmp' operation there is essentially identical to the first one, with reversed order of arguments. Therefore, it is not needed. This testcase is a simple integer comparison routine, similar to what qsort would take to sort an integer array. I think

Hello, everybody. I have a Samba domain spread over 19 offices, 5 of them have a domain controller of their own. Some of these DC work fine now that I have a quite homogeneous set of samba versions. Most of them are Debian 11 with samba 4.17. The last two DC added (in different offices) have joined the domain without problems, but both have the same problem. The can't find a RID set:

Hello, while writing a new LLVM backend I have observed that in some cases the optimizer produces an "icmp sgt i32 %a, 0" where I would have expected an "icmp ugt i32 %a, 0". For example when I feed "opt -O3 -S ..." (LLVM 2.9, Windows) with ------------------------------------------------------------------------ target datalayout = "E-p:32:32:32"

On 01/20/2013 10:56 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > I doubt you needed to add cfe-dev here. Sorry I hadn't seen this, this > seems like an easy and simple deficiency in the IR intrinsic for > memcpy. See below. > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Arnaud de Grandmaison > <arnaud.allarddegrandmaison at parrot.com > <mailto:arnaud.allarddegrandmaison at

Hi, Can any llvm pass change simple return branch into select/return pair? For example: define i10 @mod_N(i10 zeroext %a) zeroext { entry: %tmp2 = icmp ugt i10 %a, -400 ; <i1> [#uses=1] br i1 %tmp2, label %cond_true, label %return cond_true: ; preds = %entry %tmp5 = add i10 %a, 400 ; <i10> [#uses=1] ret i10 %tmp5 return: ; preds = %entry ret

Does the nonnull parameter attribute give us information about subsequent uses of that value outside of the function that has the attribute? Example: define i1 @bar(i32* nonnull %x) { ; %x must be non-null in this function %y = load i32, i32* %x %z = icmp ugt i32 %y, 23 ret i1 %z } define i1 @foo(i32* %x) { %d = call i1 @bar(i32* %x) %null_check = icmp eq i32* %x, null ; check if null

and AJB kernel-2.6.35-3.bcat.src.rpm [I see AlanBartlett as the last editor on that page] I have installed the given ajb source rpm kernel-2.6.35-3.bcat.src.rpm, and verified that it is intact: [herrold at kernel-bleeder linux-2.6.35.i686]$ rpm -Vp ~/build/ajb/sources/kernel-2.6.35-3.bcat.src.rpm warning: /home/herrold/build/ajb/sources/kernel-2.6.35-3.bcat.src.rpm: Header V3 DSA signature:

> If we don't care about trying to optimize out overflow checks in > InstCombine, I'd go with moving the complexity to CGP. I think instcombine should optimize out overflow checks (as it does today) without introducing _with_overflow calls. Are there reasons why such an approach would not work? > However, I think > InstCombine is doing the right thing here by forming these.

I doubt you needed to add cfe-dev here. Sorry I hadn't seen this, this seems like an easy and simple deficiency in the IR intrinsic for memcpy. See below. On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Arnaud de Grandmaison < arnaud.allarddegrandmaison at parrot.com> wrote: > define void @test(i16 zeroext %a) nounwind uwtable { > %r.sroa.0 = alloca i16, align 2 > %r.sroa.1 = alloca i16,

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk>wrote: > >> >> On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> >> As for why it should be an IR pass, mostly because once the selection >>> dag runs through the code, we can never