similar to: [LLVMdev] adding asserts to PHINode::addIncoming

--- include/llvm/Instructions.h | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dde0e9f5d09e5f4377fcbab2602cea1ecb111d0c.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 574 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080227/678e7a9a/attachment.bin>

Here's what I've got so far - it seems to work, aside from the fact that DeleteDeadPHIs is not removing at least one dead PHI in my test program. --------------------- static bool mergeBlockIntoSuccessor(BasicBlock *pred, BasicBlock *succ) { if (succ == pred) return false; if (pred->getFirstNonPHI() != pred->getTerminator()) return false; //

You can call addIncoming(). /// addIncoming - Add an incoming value to the end of the PHI list /// void addIncoming(Value *V, BasicBlock *BB) { assert(V && "PHI node got a null value!"); assert(BB && "PHI node got a null basic block!"); assert(getType() == V->getType() && "All operands to PHI node must be the same

Here is the code snippet that I am using to create the PHIs in the loop according to the PHIs in the new preheader. At this point I have already redirected the loop backedge and removed the preheader from the loop. for (BasicBlock::iterator II = loopHeaderBB->begin(); (PN=dyn_cast<PHINode>(II)); ++II) { // remove loop back PHI and add it to split BB

I guess I thought that once I redirected the branches and created new PHIs that LLVM would correct the variable usage when I return true (changed CFG) from the pass. Is this not the case? On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > Here is the code snippet that I am using to create the PHIs in the loop > according to the PHIs in the new preheader. At

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Chris Lattner<clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > assert and abort should never happen, just like a null pointer or > garbage pointer dereference should never happen.  How are garbage > pointer and asserts different? So what should we use to validate input, such as constructing an APFloat from a string? llvm_report_error? Or should I change my

On Feb 1, 2011, at 1:34 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On Feb 1, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Andrew Clinton wrote: > >> I have a (non-entry) basic block that contains only PHI nodes and an >> unconditional branch (that does not branch to itself). Is it always >> possible to merge this block with it's successor and produce a >> semantically equivalent program? I'm

On Feb 1, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Andrew Clinton wrote: > I have a (non-entry) basic block that contains only PHI nodes and an > unconditional branch (that does not branch to itself). Is it always > possible to merge this block with it's successor and produce a > semantically equivalent program? I'm trying to undo some of the loop > optimizations that LLVM has applied to my

Hi folks, Hope this is not a silly question. But it bothers me when I am thinking about it. My question is: 1. In the implementation of serverSplitPHINodes(), why it only checks the first PHI node for possible multiple inputs from outside the region to extract. There could be more than one PHI nodes in the header block, and the code only checks the first one. I don't quite get it.

Another quick question. In ./bindings/ocaml/Makefile.ocaml, the configurations when ENABLE_OPTIMIZED<>1 are commented, which set -g flag to $(OCAMLC). Is that for back-compatibility to support OCaml < 3.10.0? On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Erick Tryzelaar <idadesub at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Jianzhou Zhao <jianzhou at

Hi, I got a problem when I am trying to add a dummy basic block. Let say there are two blocks, A and B. A----->B I am trying to generate new BB called C which is located between A and B, but not break the edge of AB. The graph is like the following A---->B \ / \ / C There is new BB 'C' with edges AC and CB. It is kind of like what breakcriticaledge pass does.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Daniel Dunbar<daniel at zuster.org> wrote: > Fixed in r79450, along with an additional one of the same nature. > > Thanks, >  - Daniel Thanks Daniel and Enea for finding this! I'm adding a lot more test cases like this to APFloat's unittests so hopefully we won't have any other bugs lying around.

Hi Surinder, I don't see anything obviously wrong with your code. I suggest that (1) you build LLVM with assertions enabled, (2) you run the verifier on your bitcode, and (3) run your program under valgrind. Ciao, Duncan. > I am getting a segmentation fault as soon as I touch the Basic block > *b value defined as : > > std::string getPHIAssigns(const PHINode *PH) > {

I'm running into an error message about PHINode which I don't understand too well. Hopefully I can explain this clearly. At a high level, I'm just trying to add a fprintf() statement at the end of functions to show me a timestamp. However, I also add an if/then such that I can turn the printing on/off. When using llvm-gcc, I've disabled linker and assembler optimizations in

Hi all, I have encountered the following instruction: %.0.i = phi i8* [ %9, %8 ], [ %11, %10 ] How can I get the %8 and %10? I'm using http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1PHINode.html as a reference but I cannot understand how to do that. Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I guess I didn't have a clear question. Suppose we have BB1 and BB2 both point to BB3. BB1 has variable x. BB2 also as variable x. BB3 will have PHINode for x with 2 value from BB1 and BB2. BB1 BB2 \ / BB3 Now if BB1 and BB2 is extracted into a function (using ExtractCodeRegion), they will be replaced by a basic block called codeRepl (which has a call to the extracted

I am getting a segmentation fault as soon as I touch the Basic block *b value defined as :  std::string getPHIAssigns(const PHINode *PH)  { const BasicBlock *b = PH->getParent();    errs() << b->size(); where as getPHIAssigns is being called from               for (BasicBlock::iterator ins=b->begin(), e3=b->end(); ins!=e3; ++ins, ++l) // get instructions                

Hi Tobias, If the PHI node at exit block of region R has multiple inputs from the R, I split the exit block into 2. The first block contains all PHI nodes whose input are all from the region. The second is the new exit node. All branches (outside R) to the old exit now point the new exit. All regions whose exit is the old exit are also updated with the new exit node. It works like a charm.

Hi all, I have problem with ExtractCodeRegion (CodeExtractor.cpp). My original program is as follows. bb: ... %tmp.15 = load %struct.MYSQL_ROWS** %3, align 4 ... bb1: ... %tmp.1 = load %struct.MYSQL_ROWS** %6, align 4 ... bb4: ; preds = %bb1, %bb, %entry %tmp.0 = phi %struct.MYSQL_ROWS* [ null, %entry ], [ %tmp.15, %bb ], [ %tmp.1, %bb1 ]

On 01/26/2011 07:50 PM, Vu Le wrote: > I guess I didn't have a clear question. > > Suppose we have BB1 and BB2 both point to BB3. > BB1 has variable x. BB2 also as variable x. > BB3 will have PHINode for x with 2 value from BB1 and BB2. > BB1 BB2 > \ / > BB3 > > Now if BB1 and BB2 is extracted into a function > (using ExtractCodeRegion), they