similar to: [LLVMdev] Pass Manager Question

On Mar 19, 2009, at 11:43 AM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > If I have a ModulePass that requires a FunctionPass, and I include a > line like the following: > > <variable> = &getAnalysis<TheFunctionPass>(*Function); > > ... will the PassManager blindly re-run the FunctionPass each time the > ModulePass requests it, or does it use the Pass

On Dec 18, 2007, at 10:55 AM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > The attached code (which is a contrived test case) hits the following > assertion: > > test: > /home/vadve/criswell/src/llvm22/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h: > 226: > AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*, > llvm::Function&) [with AnalysisType = Pass1]: Assertion

Having a ModulePass that requires a FunctionPass that in turn requires another ModulePass results in an assertion being fired. Is this expected behavior (that seems to be undocumented), or a bug? Specifically, the following code will emit the assertion: [VMCore/PassManager.cpp:1597: virtual void llvm::ModulePass::assignPassManager(llvm::PMStack&, llvm::PassManagerType): Assertion

"A module pass can use function level passes (e.g. dominators) using getAnalysis interfacegetAnalysis<DominatorTree>(Function), if the function pass does not require any module passes." http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html In your case, A module pass (ModPass2) is trying tu use function level pass (FunPass1) which uses module level pass (ModPass1). This is not

John, This did not work. It compiles (isDeclaration was the name of the function) and I passed a reference (&F) (F is a function pointer). I still get the opt load error from the original message (UNREACHABLE exectuted!). Thanks. On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > 1. Ok will do. > 2. Ok, will do. > 3. It's a CallGraphPass. I

Hi, all: I wanted to use a FunctionPass (e.g. *MemoryDependenceAnalysis*) in a ModulePass, and then I used the method "getAnalysis<* MemoryDependenceAnalysis*>(llvm::Function *)" described at http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#ModulePass to get the FunctionPass. But , it still crashed when I invoked this pass in tool 'opt'. However, if I change my pass to

On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:05 PM, John Criswell wrote: > If you write your pass as a ModulePass, then you can iterate over the > functions in any order that you want. I had considered that, but my FunctionPass depends on other passes processing the functions first: void MyPass::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<UnifyFunctionExitNodes>();

John Criswell wrote: > Trevor Harmon wrote: >> On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:05 PM, John Criswell wrote: >> >> >>> If you write your pass as a ModulePass, then you can iterate over the >>> functions in any order that you want. >>> >> >> I had considered that, but my FunctionPass depends on other passes >> processing the functions first:

This gives me: Assertion failed: (0 && "Unable to find on the fly pass"), function getOnTheFlyPass, file PassManager.cpp #include "llvm/Module.h" #include "llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h" #include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h" using namespace llvm; struct Hello: public FunctionPass { public: static char ID; Hello(): FunctionPass(ID) {

Dear All, The attached code (which is a contrived test case) hits the following assertion: test: /home/vadve/criswell/src/llvm22/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:226: AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Function&) [with AnalysisType = Pass1]: Assertion `ResultPass && "getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was not "

Trevor Harmon wrote: > On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:05 PM, John Criswell wrote: > > >> If you write your pass as a ModulePass, then you can iterate over the >> functions in any order that you want. >> > > I had considered that, but my FunctionPass depends on other passes > processing the functions first: > Two things to consider: 1) The PassManager

ambika wrote: > Here is getAnalysisUsage() i am using, > > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { > AU.setPreservesAll(); > AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); > } > > and then I use it as, > > > bool ptrTest::runOnModule(Module &M) { > > DominatorTree &DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); > ...... >

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:35 AM, gauss<gausszhch at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, all: > > I wanted to use a FunctionPass (e.g. MemoryDependenceAnalysis) in a > ModulePass, and then I used the method > "getAnalysis<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>(llvm::Function *)"  described at > http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#ModulePass to get the > FunctionPass. But ,

Thanks John, I modify my code to like this: bool XXX::ModulePass(Module &M){ .... LoopInfo &li = getAnalysis<LoopInfo>(fi); .... } Here fi is a Function* pointing to main(). Now when I run the pass, another error shows up: AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Function&) [with AnalysisType = llvm::LoopInfo]: Assertion `ResultPass

Hello, I am trying to add some thing into LLVM, while I encountered some problems. So my situation is that I have some information W, some transform passes may change it, after these passes, I need the new W. What I did is to create an analysis pass similar to scalar-evolution or loopinfo, I can get the information by using getAnalysis<W>(); and preserve this information W by using

Devang Patel wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM, ether zhhb <etherzhhb at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> that's because FunctionPass implement the "addLowerLevelRequiredPass" >> function, but others not. >> >> so, is there any special reason that only "addLowerLevelRequiredPass" is >> allow? >> >> > >

On 11/10/11 11:48 AM, Ryan Taylor wrote: > John, > > Thanks, this does not compile though, I get this error: First, please CC the llvmdev list. That way, others having the same question can see the conversation, and others on the list can help correct any errors I make. :) > > cdfg_pass.cpp:511:11: error: ‘class llvm::Function’ has no member > named ‘getDeclaration’

Hi. I'm trying to implement a module pass which can be dynamically loaded by `opt` (against up-to-date llvm from svn). Despite what the tutorial (http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html) states in my module pass I cannot perform getAnalysis and fetch the function pass result. When trying to do so `opt` fails with the following mesage: [***@*** ***]$ opt -load

John Criswell wrote: > ambika wrote: >> Here is getAnalysisUsage() i am using, >> >> void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const { >> AU.setPreservesAll(); >> AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); >> } >> >> and then I use it as, >> >> >> bool ptrTest::runOnModule(Module&M) { >> >>

So I got very mixed results. With the CallGraphSCCPass, both `addRequired<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>` and `addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>` fail at runtime. The LLVM core has just two CallGraphSCCPasses and neither uses neither analyses, so it's hard to find a valid example. I transformed the pass into a ModulePass, using scc_iterator as shown in CGPassManager to process