similar to: [LLVMdev] Pass Manager Restriction?

"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

Good to know. I was referencing a local copy of 2.3 docs which didn't include the "does not require any module passes" statement. It appears the docs were changed two days before 2.4 was released in November. I suppose I should update my docs more often. Are there any plans to change this restriction, or any best practices to get similar behavior? Since immutable pass is a subclass

Hi all, I have a code with three passes (one loop pass and two module passes) and my own pass manager. If I schedule the loop pass between the others, my code segfaults. Is there any explanation why loop passes cannot be scheduled between two module passes? Perhaps I misunderstood the behaviour of pass managers. I paste here my "usage" information: int main(...){ Module m = ...

Hi Pablo, > I have a code with three passes (one loop pass and two module passes) > and my own pass manager. If I schedule the loop pass between the others, > my code segfaults. when developing with LLVM you should configure with --enable-assertions. That way you should get an assert failure with a helpful message rather than a crash. Is there any explanation why loop passes cannot

All, I have a ModulePass (A) calling a FunctionPass that inturn calls TargetData (a ModulePass). For reasons of code correctness and modularity I cannot reorganize my passes in any other way . When I use opt to load and run A , it gives the following error. LLVM ERROR: Bad TargetData ctor used. Tool did not specify a TargetData to use? I gather from some previous emails that this was not

I am trying to use KalmanSmooth to smooth a time series fitted by arima (and with missing values), but the $smooth component of the output baffles me. Look at the following example: testts <- arima.sim(list(ar=0.9),n=100) testts[6:14] <- NA testmod <- arima(testts, c(1,0,0)) testsmooth <- KalmanSmooth(testts, testmod$model) par(mfrow=c(2,1)) plot(testsmooth$smooth,

I am using opt , so i cm confused if i need to do this. On the other hand I modified my functionPass not to call TargetData , and I still get this error. My functionPass still calls Alias Analysis though. Aparna On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:15 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > aparna kotha wrote: > >> All, >> I have a ModulePass (A) calling a

When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will segfault. What's odd is that if I rearrange this (add required for DominatorTree before LoopInfo), it does not segfault. I realize that LoopInfo requires and preserves DominatorTree, but this

Is there a reason for why `-asan` and `-asan-module` can be mixed but Function passes and Module passes with the new PM can't be mixed? - Leo On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:21 AM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com> wrote: > > On 09/27/2018 12:25 PM, Philip Pfaffe wrote: >> >> `opt < %s -passed='asan' -asan-module -S` > > asan-module is another

Hi, I''m new to puppet and trying to get started using it just in local mode. My basic question is: how can i reference a static file within the module (eg in the module''s files/ subdirectory, as described in http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/ModuleOrganisation). I suppose i could try using a full.absolute path to the file, but that seems to completely defeat the purpose

Greetinigs, I am extending llc to include runtime checks for calls (in X86). So a call 'call target' is altered to look like this: [some check] jne error_function call target I've done this by implementing a MachineFunctionPass that is instantiated and added to the PassManager in X86TargetMachine::addPreRegAlloc. In order to create the jne-instruction I need some BasicBlock

aparna kotha wrote: > All, > > I have a ModulePass (A) calling a FunctionPass that inturn calls > TargetData (a ModulePass). For reasons of code correctness and > modularity I cannot reorganize my passes in any other way . > > When I use opt to load and run A , it gives the following error. > > LLVM ERROR: Bad TargetData ctor used. Tool did not specify a >

Hi, Does the current LLVM backend support reading in profile information (without preserving across transformations)? An earlier poster http://groups.google.com/group/llvm-dev/browse_thread/thread/4bd65dbe84394bb7 noted that accessing execution counts in a MachineFunction pass (using the BasicBlock* corresponding to the respective MachineBasicBlock) returned 0 for all blocks. Running llc with

> > `opt < %s -passed='asan' -asan-module -S` > asan-module is another ModulePass, not a commandline option. You can't mix that like this. Cheers, Philip > doesn't produce the same IR as > > `opt < %s -asan -asan-module -S` > > More specifically, the only thing missing seems to be the > `asan.module_ctor` that should get added to the global

Thanks for the response. I do have assertions enabled, and none of them are getting hit. I did do a search of the mailing list for the past year (approximately) before writing my email, and what I found was that you should be allowed to use LoopInfo and other analysis function passes from a module pass, with the only difference being that getAnalysis is passed the function. The example code I

Hi Michael, > When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault > where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and > DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will > segfault. I suggest you build LLVM with assertions enabled - then you should get a helpful error message rather than a segfault. I think you are not allowed to

How can I vmjc to run CallGraphSCCPasses? I wrote a test pass that does nothing, and all vmjc says is: vmjc: PassManager.cpp:1604: virtual void llvm::ModulePass::assignPassManager(llvm::PMStack&, llvm::PassManagerType): Assertion `!PMS.empty() && "Unable to find appropriate Pass Manager"' failed. 0 vmjc 0x08a6bfd8 Aborted Running even a built in pass like prune-eh

In the following scrap of code (pared down from actually useful code), the func->dump() command segfaults iff the commented-out line is uncommented. This is with llvm 3.0. I'm only dipping my toes into the waters of llvm for the first time, and have no idea what I am doing incorrectly. In actual code, I would be wanting to call the memcpy intrinsic eventually, of course. int main(void)

On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Joseph Blomstedt wrote: > Good to know. I was referencing a local copy of 2.3 docs which didn't > include the "does not require any module passes" statement. It appears > the docs were changed two days before 2.4 was released in November. I > suppose I should update my docs more often. > > Are there any plans to change this

Hi Michael, hi Duncan, yesterday I stumbled over something that might be related. At least I could also just be doing some initialization wrong or something in this direction... In my case, I hit a segfault in PassInfo::isAnalysisGroup() after PassManager.add(myModulePass) is called. My setup seems fairly simple, the attached code should reproduce the error. Compile with g++ test.cpp