similar to: [LLVMdev] New transformation

I am trying to parse LLVM IR from a bit code file. I went through the following steps. hello.cpp #include <iostream> int main() { std::cout << "Hello world!" << "\n"; return 0;} dump.cpp #include <llvm/IR/Module.h>#include <llvm/IRReader/IRReader.h>#include <llvm/IR/LLVMContext.h>#include <llvm/Support/SourceMgr.h> using

Hi, I have: ... @.str1 = private unnamed_addr constant [21 x i8] c"Now f is a function\0A\00", align 1 ; Function Attrs: ssp uwtable define i32 @_Z1fv() #2 { entry: %call = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([21 x i8]* @.str1, i32 0, i32 0)) ret i32 0 } Then I get after trying to erase the function from the module: 511

On 23 October 2013 22:41, Vassil Vassilev <vvasilev at cern.ch> wrote: > Hi, > I have: > ... > @.str1 = private unnamed_addr constant [21 x i8] c"Now f is a > function\0A\00", align 1 > ; Function Attrs: ssp uwtable > define i32 @_Z1fv() #2 { > entry: > %call = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([21 x > i8]* @.str1, i32 0,

I fell over this issue yesterday myself with lots of asserts being thrown. I think the issue is in lib/IR/AsmWriter.cpp:1618 in the function AssemblyWriter::printFunction(const Function *F) Looking at the code I think the 2nd for loop should be preceded by the test ... if (Idx < AS.getNumSlots()) Not sure why it doesn't fail on other platforms as it looks like it should be a genuine

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I only recently started to look at LLVM assembly generated by Clang, > and one of the first thing I saw was like: > > define i32 @foo(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind { > %1 = tail call i32 @bar(i32 %a) nounwind > %2 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0 > br i1 %2, label %5, label %3 >

Hi, I am running a basic block pass (and iterating through each instruction). Is it possible to convert the basic block instruction form llvm IR to x86 IRWITHIN the path ? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090510/9c636a9a/attachment.html>

Hi, I am new in the "Linux business" and i need to add an optimization to the LLVM compiler. I would like to know what is the bast way to debug (IDE) the LLVM compiler ? To be more precise, what is the equivalent to Microsoft visual studio on Linux platform? is it eclipse? I want features like: syntax highlight, go to def, etc. Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

Thank you. Is it possible to determine the liveout of the operands (see example bellow) ? %5 = add i32 %4, %3 For '%5': i can simply use " i->isUsedOutsideOfBlock() " For '%3' and '%4' : this is the question ... >From your answer, is it possible to determine *which* value is liveout ( in binary instruction)? On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:57 AM,

Thank you you answer. On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>wrote: > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Rotem Varon <varonrotem at gmail.com> wrote: > > Its not x86 IR nor x86 assembly. I have x86 IR "like" instructions ( add > > R1, R2, R3 and so...) > >> > >> If it's really > >> x86

I believe Dan has added a pass to compute livein / liveout values. Evan Sent from my iPhone On May 30, 2009, at 5:03 AM, Rotem Varon <varonrotem at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you. > > Is it possible to determine the liveout of the operands (see example > bellow) ? > > %5 = add i32 %4, %3 > > For '%5': i can simply use "

I will start with that i am vary grateful for your time.And continue with, i am sorry if my Qs aren't quite accurate( i just started with the LLVM compiler). On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Rotem Varon <varonrotem at gmail.com> wrote: > > I need to add a new optimization to the LLVM

The pass you're referring to is in include/llvm/Analysis/LiveValues.h and lib/Analysis/LiveValues.cpp. It computes conservative approximations for specific liveness queries, rather than full livein/liveout information. It's intended to be used as a heuristic. Dan On May 30, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Evan Cheng wrote: > I believe Dan has added a pass to compute livein / liveout values. >

Hi, How can i know, if a value have uses outside of the current basic block (liveout), without iterating through all the basic block ? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090530/71681bc2/attachment.html>

Hi, I am a student (software engineering), and i am using the LLVM in my project (I am sorry of the lack of details, but i want to take the minimum of your time, if you want more details don't hesitate...). I need to add a new optimization to the LLVM compiler. The optimization ALREADY written for x86 IR (i mean that the code that handles the optimization is designated to work on assembly 86)

On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 15:17, Rotem Varon <varonrotem at gmail.com> wrote: > I am running a basic block pass (and iterating through each instruction). > Is it possible to convert the basic block instruction form llvm IR to x86 IR > WITHIN the path ? > It seems to me that phi nodes would mean that you can't convert any unit smaller than a function to native code. ~ Scott

Hi, I believe that my question isn't clear. So, please let me rephrase : I am running a basic block pass (and iterating through each instruction). Is it possible to convert the basic block instruction form llvm IR to x86 IRWITHIN the path ? I mean: is LLVM API exists for this purpose ? Again, thanks. On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 10:30 PM, me22 <me22.ca at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun,

Hey everyone, I'm currently trying to figure out a method for providing a unique identification of an llvm::Instruction that is consistent with the output of an AssemblyWriter. Obviously this is easy for named instructions: In this case the identification is the name itself, but I'd like to have the same thing for unnamed instructions. If I understand the code in AssemblyWriter.cpp

Hi I am not a good programmer but for my project i have to use llvm to generate CFG for c programs where i have a mapping from IR instruction in CFG to their respective c instruction. After surfing a in source of llvm i did the following change in printInstruction() function in llvm/lib/VMCore/AsmWriter.cpp file. .....void AssemblyWriter::printInstruction(const Instruction &I) { if

Hi. I want to do a cutomized points-to analysis on IR. Suppose that we have: *%91 = bitcast i8* %90 to %struct.demux_packet*, !dbg !2688* I want to store sth similar to %91 -> target of %90, which records the target of pointer named %91. How can I access the names (Here, %90 and %91)? I know that I can put the whole line for an instruction into a string, using the following code: *string str;*

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: