similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm address of

On 2009-05-24 19:42, Paul Martin wrote: > I'm trying to generate the equivalent of this function dynamically in > llvm (a la http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html) but after > half a day of searching I still haven't found how to create the > equivalent of the & (address of) operator in the llvm API, more > exactly how do I obtain the i8* from the i32 below >

On 2008-10-11 00:34, Evan Cheng wrote: > On Oct 10, 2008, at 1:43 PM, John Criswell wrote: > > >> Dear All, >> >> Are there a set of libraries for easily manipulating the LLVM debug >> information? For example, given an Instruction *, is there an >> interface >> that will find the nearest llvm.dbg.stoppoint(), or given an alloca, >> is

On Oct 10, 2008, at 1:43 PM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > Are there a set of libraries for easily manipulating the LLVM debug > information? For example, given an Instruction *, is there an > interface > that will find the nearest llvm.dbg.stoppoint(), or given an alloca, > is > there an interface for getting its source level information by tracing > it to

That's not an example, that's a tutorial, and an incomplete one at that. However I did find the Kaleidoscope example in the subversion repository head. Any clue as to why when we attempt to follow the very simple example in the llvm-2.5 release docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html we construct a module state that verifies but then when we ask it to emit, we get a stack overflow from LLVM? Is

Dear All, Are there a set of libraries for easily manipulating the LLVM debug information? For example, given an Instruction *, is there an interface that will find the nearest llvm.dbg.stoppoint(), or given an alloca, is there an interface for getting its source level information by tracing it to a llvm.dbg.declare()? As far as I know, no such utility interfaces exist. While I can role my

Hello everyone, I'm currently constructing a graph from LLVM bitcode, and I have a question about accessing the names of the variables shown in the .ll assembly file, assuming it's possible... For example, with %2 = load i32* %x_addr, align 4 ; <i32> [#uses=1] I can retrieve the opcodeName() from the Instruction object, which is "load". I can also access the operand

Thank you very much for you help, Renato! I read through paper you referred and also this document - http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html Following these instructions to create successful function I run into some problems: 1) llvm::getGlobalContext() does not exists anymore? "llvm/LLVMContext.h" too? 2) creating instance of IRBuilder don't require template (from tutorial

Hi all, I'm a new user to LLVM. Not really sure if this is the correct place to post, since there isn't really any other forums around. Anyway, the issue I'm encountering is that, I was trying out the first tutorial (http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html). I attempted to do this in another folder that was copied from llvm/projects/sample. I created a new folder called

James Stanier wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm currently constructing a graph from LLVM bitcode, and I have a question > about accessing the names of the variables shown in the .ll assembly file, > assuming it's possible... > > For example, with > > %2 = load i32* %x_addr, align 4 ; <i32> [#uses=1] > > I can retrieve the opcodeName() from the

What exactly is M in that code you posted? Oleg Knut wrote: > > Thank you very much for you help, Renato! > > I read through paper you referred and also this document - > http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html > > Following these instructions to create successful function I run into > some problems: > 1) llvm::getGlobalContext() does not exists anymore?

The other repliers have been right that you probably want to use Value*s rather than string names in constructing your dependency graph, but I wanted to clear up a second possible point of confusion. When you see %2 in the assembly, that's an indication that the instruction's name is empty. That is, value->getName() == "". As far as I know, llvm-dis just generates numbers in

Hi Dale, I think Bob is right: the type legalizer shouldn't be turning v16i8 into v16i32, what should happen is that the return type of the BUILD_VECTOR continues to be v16i8, but the type of the operands changes to i32, so you end up with a BUILD_VECTOR that takes 16 lots of i32, and produces a v16i8. The target then has all the info it needs to produce the best code, but needs to be careful

LLVM seems to be generating way too complex of branching based on the short-circuit optimization. The code in question is as follows: define void @ test_fc_while_and(float %x, float %y, float addrspace(11)* %result) nounwind { entry: %tobool3 = fcmp une float %x, 0.000000e+000 ; <i1> [#uses=1] %tobool24 = fcmp une float %y, 0.000000e+000 ;

2010/1/3 Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com>: > On 2010-01-03 10:33, Chris Lattner wrote: >> If you're interested in this new extension, here is some more information with some less-than-obvious aspects of the design: >> http://blog.llvm.org/2010/01/address-of-label-and-indirect-branches.html >> >> This feature was added to LLVM by Bob Wilson, Dan Gohman and

On 2009-09-06 20:52, Bill Wendling wrote: > The problem he's facing here isn't necessarily one of correctness. > He's dealing with undefined behavior (at least in C code). There are > no guarantees that the compiler will retain a certain semantic > interpretation of an undefined construct between different versions of > the compiler, let alone different

On 2010-01-03 10:33, Chris Lattner wrote: > If you're interested in this new extension, here is some more information with some less-than-obvious aspects of the design: > http://blog.llvm.org/2010/01/address-of-label-and-indirect-branches.html > > This feature was added to LLVM by Bob Wilson, Dan Gohman and I to mainline back in November. If you have questions or comments about

If you're interested in this new extension, here is some more information with some less-than-obvious aspects of the design: http://blog.llvm.org/2010/01/address-of-label-and-indirect-branches.html This feature was added to LLVM by Bob Wilson, Dan Gohman and I to mainline back in November. If you have questions or comments about the post, this is a good thread to discuss them on :) -Chris

On Sep 6, 2009, at 4:01 PM, Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com> wrote: > On 2009-09-06 20:52, Bill Wendling wrote: >> The problem he's facing here isn't necessarily one of correctness. >> He's dealing with undefined behavior (at least in C code). There are >> no guarantees that the compiler will retain a certain semantic >> interpretation of an

On Sep 6, 2009, at 2:01 PM, Török Edwin wrote: > On 2009-09-06 20:52, Bill Wendling wrote: >> The problem he's facing here isn't necessarily one of correctness. >> He's dealing with undefined behavior (at least in C code). There are >> no guarantees that the compiler will retain a certain semantic >> interpretation of an undefined construct between different

Hi, Is there any way to sort a tabel with a colum with IP-address? table: id rank color status ip 138 29746 yellow no 162.131.58.26 138 29746 red yes 162.131.58.16 138 29746 blue yes 162.131.58.10 138 29746 red no 162.131.58.17 138 29746 yellow no 162.131.58.14 138 29746 red no 162.131.58.13 138 29746 yellow no 162.132.58.15 139 29746 green no 162.252.20.69 140 29746 red yes