Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1100 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] lli aborts on arm QEMU"
2009 Jun 24
0
[LLVMdev] lli aborts on arm QEMU
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()!"'
2009 Sep 27
5
[LLVMdev] A basicblock iterator bug in llvm
Dear developers:
When I am doing basicblock pass, I meet a bug: there is an
iterator "I" in a basicblock, and it is not pointing to the first
instruction in this basicblock. However, "I--;" will fail by an
assertion.
The basic block ("I" is pointing to the second instruction) in test.ll:
bb: ; preds = %bb1
%1 = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* noalias
2009 Nov 03
0
[LLVMdev] Problem running lli on ARM
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
2009 Sep 27
0
[LLVMdev] A basicblock iterator bug in llvm
On 27 Sep., 05:45, hc2... at columbia.edu wrote:
> Dear developers:
> When I am doing basicblock pass, I meet a bug: there is an
> iterator "I" in a basicblock, and it is not pointing to the first
> instruction in this basicblock. However, "I--;" will fail by an
> assertion.
Hi hc!
are you on SVN trunk?
Cheers,
Gabor
>
> The basic block
2009 Sep 27
0
[LLVMdev] A basicblock iterator bug in llvm
AAAH!
I see you are still at 2.5. Then this patch (the fix)
is relevant for you:
<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/ADT/
ilist.h?r1=66061&r2=68785&diff_format=h>
Cheers,
Gabor
On 27 Sep., 05:45, hc2... at columbia.edu wrote:
> Dear developers:
> When I am doing basicblock pass, I meet a bug: there is an
> iterator "I" in
2007 Sep 19
4
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 06:41:38PM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote:
> The "make check" produced:
> === Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 2209
> # of unexpected failures 41
> # of expected failures 5
> gmake[1]: *** [check-local] Error 1
> gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/emil/ll/objdir-llvm/test'
> gmake: ***
2007 Sep 19
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
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
2010 Jun 18
1
[LLVMdev] Erasing Instruction
Hi,
Can anyone tell me how to erase an instruction, (specially a
load/store instruction) ?
If I use Instr->eraseFromParent(), I get following error. Note the
instruction does not have any use.
opt: /home/chayan/llvm/llvm-2.6/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:218:
llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>&
llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator++() [with NodeTy =
llvm::Instruction]: Assertion
2007 Sep 19
2
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
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 <
2012 Dec 20
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM segmentation fault / need use Instruction instead of Instruction*
I may be mistaken as I just took a quick look, but in ilist_node the
function "getPrevNode()" actually calls a method on the previous node:
NodeTy *getPrevNode() {
NodeTy *Prev = this->getPrev();
// Check for sentinel.
if (!Prev->getNext())
return 0;
return Prev;
}
http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/ilist__node_8h_source.html#l00058
Try checking if
2009 Feb 24
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
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
2012 Dec 20
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM segmentation fault / need use Instruction instead of Instruction*
Hello John,
I was following your procedures and I isolated the problem. The problem are
represented by the basic blocks with only one element.
for (Function::iterator II = F.begin(), EE = F.end(); II != EE; ++II, ++ii)
{
BasicBlock* BB=II;
if (BB->getTerminator())
{
Instruction* current = BB->getTerminator();
Instruction* previous;
2009 Feb 25
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
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
2009 Sep 27
1
[LLVMdev] A basicblock iterator bug in llvm
Quoting Gabor Greif <ggreif at gmail.com>:
Hi Gabor,
I can not open the link, can you send again?
> AAAH!
>
> I see you are still at 2.5. Then this patch (the fix)
> is relevant for you:
>
> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/ADT/
> ilist.h?r1=66061&r2=68785&diff_format=h>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gabor
>
>
>
2009 Feb 25
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
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
2002 Sep 16
1
[LLVMdev] problem with LLVM
Hi, all.
When I run the llvm using the inline option. I always got the
following error message. So I cannot even use inline option.
suna14|~/MP1|[37]% opt -inline < scalarize.llvm.bc > /dev/null
../../../include/Support/ilist:104: failed assertion
`Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"'
Abort
I didn't use my own pass. Please let me know if you
2009 Jan 16
1
[LLVMdev] Problem using ilist container
Hi All,
I have just started using LLVM .
i am facing a issue while using ilist container.
Here is a struct with ilist container as its one element.
typedef ilist<Instruction *> InstListType;
struct list_node {
int Impact;
InstListType InstList;
};
list_node
2012 Dec 20
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM segmentation fault / need use Instruction instead of Instruction*
Hello,
Thank you for your answer. If I want to use
then I have
error: ‘NodeTy* llvm::ilist_half_node<NodeTy>::getPrev() [with NodeTy =
llvm::Instruction]’ is protected
error: ‘llvm::ilist_half_node<llvm::Instruction>’ is not an accessible base
of ‘llvm::Instruction’
Do you know any other method to access the previous instruction of a
terminator instruction? PS: back() is not an
2012 Dec 20
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM segmentation fault / need use Instruction instead of Instruction*
getPrevNode<http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1ilist__node.html#a77b897207ef0a1ae95c404695aed9a4b>()
Get the previous node, or 0 for the list head. I don't see any method like
hasPrevNode.
It can be a weird problem because "current->getPrevNode()" is indicating to
"current" itself (the problem appears for the BB with only one element)?
On Thu, Dec
2012 Dec 20
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM segmentation fault / need use Instruction instead of Instruction*
I solved by checking
if(BB->size()>1)
Thank you all for the help !
Now debugging the next segfault.
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu <
alexandruionutdiaconescu at gmail.com> wrote:
> getPrevNode<http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1ilist__node.html#a77b897207ef0a1ae95c404695aed9a4b>()
> Get the previous node, or 0 for the list