similar to: [LLVMdev] Verifier Error

Hi, I tried creating intrinsics which are to be placeholders for a set of instructions which should not be executed by the backend. I want to retain only intrinsic,phi and terminator instructions in a basic block. I have taken care of the external dependencies of basic block. How do I delete the rest of the instructions? Thank You Aditya P.S:

Hi, I tried creating intrinsics which are to be placeholders for a set of instructions which should not be executed by the backend. I want to retain only intrinsic,phi and terminator instructions in a basic block. I have taken care of the external dependencies of basic block. How do I delete the rest of the instructions? Thank You Aditya P.S:

I get the following error when I try to run arm lli on QEMU: lli: llvm-arm/src/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:197: typename bidirectional_iterator<NodeTy, int>::reference llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator*() const [with NodeTy = llvm::RecyclerStruct]: Assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"' failed. 0 lli 0x006abbfc Stack dump: 0.

hannibal hannibal wrote: > I get the following error when I try to run arm lli on QEMU: > > lli: llvm-arm/src/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:197: typename bidirectional_iterator<NodeTy, int>::reference llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator*() const [with NodeTy = llvm::RecyclerStruct]: Assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"'

Is this the same issue as PR1686? If so, please add to it. What kind of host machine are you using? Thanks, Evan On Sep 19, 2007, at 12:45 AM, Emil Mikulic wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 05:24:12PM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote: >> http://goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au/~emil/llvm2.1-check-debug.txt > > Here's an ARM test that cores: > > $ llvm-as <

On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 05:24:12PM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote: > http://goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au/~emil/llvm2.1-check-debug.txt Here's an ARM test that cores: $ llvm-as < /home/emil/ll/llvm-2.1/test/CodeGen/ARM/2007-01-19-InfiniteLoop.ll | llc -march=arm -mattr=+v6,+vfp2 Segmentation fault (core dumped) $ gdb `which llc` llc.core [...] (gdb) where #0 0x0853d606 in

Evan: I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members and passes results back via reference parameters. -scooter On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > I believe this patch has broken a PPC app that I am tracking. Here is a > reduced test case. Reproduce

Hi all, I am in the process of developing a installer utility for ARM target which can compile any source files to ARM native executable. This installer utility should be present on target itself (whether this is feasible or not?). For achieving this i compiled llvm with clang for target. I copied the binaries to target and when it tried to compile a sample c code i am getting the following

I believe this patch has broken a PPC app that I am tracking. Here is a reduced test case. Reproduce with llc -mattr=+Altivec -mcpu=g5. The backtrace looks like this: #0 0x9333ae42 in __kill () #1 0x9333ae34 in kill$UNIX2003 () #2 0x933ad23a in raise () #3 0x933b9679 in abort () #4 0x933ae3db in __assert_rtn () #5 0x0008bd8f in llvm::MVT::getVectorElementType (this=0xbfffdda4) at

Scott, In case you missed it, I reimplemented your BuildVectorSDNode::isConstantSplat method following the suggestions from Chris. The revised version passes "make check" for llvm. Assuming that it also passes Evan's tests, I think it should also do what you need for CellSPU. On Feb 25, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Scott Michel wrote: > Evan: > > I work on reverting it,

Evan: I work on reverting it, although, when I tried yesterday, it wasn't particularly clean (lots of rejected patches, presumably due to intervening commits.) Are you still getting the backtrace or is this just a case of incorrectly generated code? -scooter On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com> wrote: > Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm

Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm test suite does not contain enough vector code to fully test this. Can you revert the patch first? Evan On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Scott Michel wrote: > Evan: > > I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest > BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members > and passes results back via

To allow other pieces of code to process XML files easily, move the xml.ml* and xpath_helpers.ml* from v2v to mllib. --- docs/C_SOURCE_FILES | 2 +- mllib/Makefile.am | 9 ++++++-- {v2v => mllib}/xml-c.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++------------------- {v2v => mllib}/xml.ml | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ {v2v =>

Hi all, I'm experimenting with the Interpreter and all look good so far :) Unfortunately when I play with the visitBinartOperator() method I have the following assertion error: Support/APInt.cpp:233: llvm::APInt llvm::APInt::operator*(const llvm::APInt &) const: Assertion `BitWidth == RHS.BitWidth && "Bit widths must be the same"' failed. I have recompiled llvm and

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006, Reid Spencer wrote: > I just updated again (both llvm and llvm-gcc). The only thing that > changed was: > P test/Regression/CFrontend/2005-12-04-DeclarationLineNumbers.c > > The regression test below was done *with* your llvm-gcc changes to llvm- > expand.c. I don't know what the failures are all about, but I will try > it again. If its the same,

The various intrinsic assert/crashes should all be fixed on mainline CVS (they are PR733, which I just fixed). The only ones that I'm wary of are: XPASS: /proj/llvm/build/../llvm/test/Regression/CFrontend/2004-02-20- StaticRedeclare.c.tr FAIL: /proj/llvm/build/../llvm/test/Regression/CFrontend/2005-12-04- DeclarationLineNumbers.c: In the former case, I would guess that the test isn't

Hello! Suppose I have a code like this: %tmp.aux = cast bool %tmp.24 to int %tmp.x = xor int %tmp.aux, 1 ; negates tmp.24 %tmp.xx = cast int %tmp.x to bool %tmp.y = or bool %tmp.xx, %tmp.24 ; will be always true br bool %tmp.y, label %next6, label %next7 Is there an optimization in LLVM that will recognize that %tmp.y is

Hi List, My IR compiles fine and runs. I've tried to add DebugIR pass so as to be able to debug and profile it (since source is an SQL query all that I can debug and profile is IR itself). When I tried to add it to pass manager I got the following assert: Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. 0x00007ffff3fe4425 in __GI_raise (sig=<optimized out>) at

I just updated again (both llvm and llvm-gcc). The only thing that changed was: P test/Regression/CFrontend/2005-12-04-DeclarationLineNumbers.c The regression test below was done *with* your llvm-gcc changes to llvm- expand.c. I don't know what the failures are all about, but I will try it again. If its the same, I'll let you know. Reid. On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 16:20 -0500, Chris Lattner

On Apr 14, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Brice Lin wrote: > I just read the LLVM Programmer's Manual, which mentions (but > specifically does not include any details of) the InstVisitor > template. Could someone please provide an example of how to use this > template to find (as an example) all CallSites for the function > strcpy? If this is really what you want to do, then the easiest