similar to: [LLVMdev] [POTENTIAL API CHANGE] Improving llvm::Value getName()/setName()

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 7000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [POTENTIAL API CHANGE] Improving llvm::Value getName()/setName()"

2011 Nov 17
0
[LLVMdev] Fwd: Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
Never create a Twine as a local variable. V->setName(Twine("new_name")); should work fine, however. Note that Twine itself has an implicit constructor from const char *, so this code: V->setName("new_name"); should also work fine. Nick Ryan Taylor wrote: > Basically I have two separate passes (first is a loop pass) which are > two different files and
2011 Nov 17
0
[LLVMdev] Fwd: Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
So is this simply not possible? On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > Nick, > > Thanks for this info, though this didn't help my problem at all. > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > >> Never create a Twine as a local variable. >> >>
2011 Nov 17
2
[LLVMdev] Fwd: Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
Nick, Thanks for this info, though this didn't help my problem at all. On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Never create a Twine as a local variable. > > V->setName(Twine("new_name")); > > should work fine, however. Note that Twine itself has an implicit > constructor from const char *, so this code: > >
2011 Nov 17
2
[LLVMdev] Fwd: Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
Basically I have two separate passes (first is a loop pass) which are two different files and two different opts but I need to keep the data consistent (ie, I want the changes to show up the resulting .bc output file from the first (loop) pass so the second pass can use these new names. Currently, when I print out "BB->getName().str()" after the code below, I get the correct renaming
2011 Nov 21
5
[LLVMdev] Fwd: Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
I would have thought this would have been possible. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > So is this simply not possible? > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Nick, >> >> Thanks for this info, though this didn't help my problem at all. >> >>
2010 Feb 07
0
[LLVMdev] Help with Mac OS X 10.6.2 build
Hi, Try these scripts to build llvm and llvm-gcc. It's the ones I use and I managed to get them to work when I saw another build script using those CFLAGS. They compile llvm and stuff using only x86_64, but you can then generate code for i386 (just use a different backend). The configuration options are at the top of the scripts and they install llvm and llvm-gcc to ~/llvm. Regards,
2011 Jul 19
0
[LLVMdev] Correct use of StringRef and Twine
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:38 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > I'm attempting to do some amount of mass migration from const std::string& (& const char*) to StringRef. Great! > In doing so I stumbled across the fact that while StringRef has no op+ to speak of (well, it has += and I added a manual StringRef+std::string and std::string+StringRef for now - though I'm thinking perhaps
2011 Jul 19
3
[LLVMdev] Correct use of StringRef and Twine
> And for arguments, generally always use Twine as the default, it allows construction of complex things, and is still efficient when passed the equiv of a StringRef (with the toStringRef method).  The only annoying thing about it is that the API to do this requires a temporary SmallVector to scribble in, which makes it more difficult to use. Yes, I noticed this - which was one of my concerns
2011 Jul 18
3
[LLVMdev] Correct use of StringRef and Twine
I'm attempting to do some amount of mass migration from const std::string& (& const char*) to StringRef. In doing so I stumbled across the fact that while StringRef has no op+ to speak of (well, it has += and I added a manual StringRef+std::string and std::string+StringRef for now - though I'm thinking perhaps they can be skipped in favor of Twine operations), Twine does provide a
2010 Jul 19
0
[LLVMdev] Function::getName in CallGraphSCCPass causes bus error
Hi Trevor, > struct Hello : public CallGraphSCCPass { > static char ID; // Pass identification, replacement for typeid > Hello() : CallGraphSCCPass(&ID) {} > virtual bool runOnSCC(std::vector<CallGraphNode *> &SCC) { > CallGraphNode *node = SCC.front(); > Function *function = node->getFunction(); >
2010 Feb 07
3
[LLVMdev] Help with Mac OS X 10.6.2 build
Greetings, I am having trouble getting the Kaleidoscope example to build from tutorial #3 on Mac OS X 10.6.2. I didn't have too much trouble getting llvm-2.6 and llvm-gcc-frontend to build. Thanks for the help. Here are the steps I followed: Environment variables for build export LLVMOBJDIR=/opt/llvm export TARGETOPTIONS='--with-arch=nocona --with-tune=generic' export
2010 Jul 16
2
[LLVMdev] Function::getName in CallGraphSCCPass causes bus error
Hi, I'm trying to use CallGraphSCCPass, but I keep getting a bus error. I can reproduce the problem quite easily using the lib/Transforms/Hello example. I simply mix in these changes: #include "llvm/CallGraphSCCPass.h" ... struct Hello : public CallGraphSCCPass { static char ID; // Pass identification, replacement for typeid Hello() : CallGraphSCCPass(&ID) {}
2011 Nov 17
0
[LLVMdev] Problem getting LoopInfo inside non-LoopPass
LLVMers, So, I'm trying to write a pass that changes the names of the basic blocks through the use of Value, so: Value *V = *BasicBlockPtr; const Twine Tname("new_name"); V->setName(Tname); But when I run the opt and look at the IR output nothing is changed? Not sure what I'm doing wrong. Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
2019 Apr 04
2
single-threaded code-gen and how to make it support multi-thread
Hi llvm-dev, Our code base has a ancient copy of llvm (ver 3.5.1), and it uses the LLVM code gen for some domain-specific language. The previous dev left a global lock around the usage of LLVM code gen stating that because LLVM code gen can only be accessed single-threaded it needs to be protected with this global lock. But now this lock has caused some perf issues as we pretty much lose
2020 Mar 05
0
[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.5 30/67] vhost: Check docket sk_family instead of call getname
From: Eugenio P?rez <eperezma at redhat.com> [ Upstream commit 42d84c8490f9f0931786f1623191fcab397c3d64 ] Doing so, we save one call to get data we already have in the struct. Also, since there is no guarantee that getname use sockaddr_ll parameter beyond its size, we add a little bit of security here. It should do not do beyond MAX_ADDR_LEN, but syzbot found that ax25_getname writes more
2020 Mar 05
0
[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.4 26/58] vhost: Check docket sk_family instead of call getname
From: Eugenio P?rez <eperezma at redhat.com> [ Upstream commit 42d84c8490f9f0931786f1623191fcab397c3d64 ] Doing so, we save one call to get data we already have in the struct. Also, since there is no guarantee that getname use sockaddr_ll parameter beyond its size, we add a little bit of security here. It should do not do beyond MAX_ADDR_LEN, but syzbot found that ax25_getname writes more
2020 Mar 05
0
[PATCH AUTOSEL 4.19 12/31] vhost: Check docket sk_family instead of call getname
From: Eugenio P?rez <eperezma at redhat.com> [ Upstream commit 42d84c8490f9f0931786f1623191fcab397c3d64 ] Doing so, we save one call to get data we already have in the struct. Also, since there is no guarantee that getname use sockaddr_ll parameter beyond its size, we add a little bit of security here. It should do not do beyond MAX_ADDR_LEN, but syzbot found that ax25_getname writes more
2019 Aug 23
2
LLVM-8.0 | Requesting Help : Function->getName() returns empty string
Hello All, I am creating a Module and getting Function pointer as below in some function. Function *fn = module->getFunction(fnName); printf("func Name: %s.\n", fn->getName().str().c_str()); . . return (intptr_t) fn; This prints : "func Name: main." I convert the ptr to int and return it. Later I am receiving this as a Func Handler in other function
2008 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] Problems in removing a cloned instruction.
Hi, I'm gonna try to give some feedback, but I have only been working with LLVM for a few days, so don't take what I'm saying without verifying :-) > BasicBlock *ProgSlicer::CloneBasicBlock(const BasicBlock *BB, > DenseMap<const Value*, Value*> &ValueMap, > const char *NameSuffix, Function *F) { > > BasicBlock
2009 Feb 27
3
[LLVMdev] warning from -instcombine
Hi, I noticed this code in lib/Transforms/Scalar/InstructionCombining.cpp: cerr << "WARNING: While resolving call to function '" << Callee->getName() << "' arguments were dropped!\n"; If you're using LLVM as a static compiler, this warning is a bit incongruous, because it's not formatted in the same way as warnings from