similar to: [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r81845 - in /llvm/trunk: lib/VMCore/ConstantFold.cpp test/Assembler/insertextractvalue.ll

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:51:47AM +0000, Tim Northover wrote: > Hello, > > I noticed a bit of a gap in the current code for unions: a > ConstantUnion cannot be written out to .ll. I've been continuing plugging gaps as I find them, which might not be the best way to solve this problem, but it has produced something that seems to do roughly what I expect. I've split it into

Hi, I solved it. From the ConstantStruct you can call getOperand() multiple times, so "mine" as deep as you can. On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu < alexandruionutdiaconescu at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Sebastian, > > Thanks for the response. > > I already did this : > > I cast the entire annotated expression to Value*. Then, in

Hi Sebastian, Thanks for the response. I already did this : I cast the entire annotated expression to Value*. Then, in order to avoid ugly things like getAsString(), I check if V->getValueID() == Value::ConstantArrayVal in order to cast it to ConstantArray. Because it contains only array[0], I cast array0>getOperand(0) to ConstantStruct. Therefore, from ConstantStruct you can get all the

Thank you very much. The code to initialize h1 to non-zero values was what I was looking for. It's almost working except for a type mismatch wrt dlist* llist field of h1. dlist static_lst[10] = { {1, 5, NULL}, ... }; dhash h1[10] = {{"myfile.txt", static_lst}, ... }; Along the lines of the code you had sent, I created a GlobalVariable* llist of type [10 x %struct.dlist]* for the

Evan Cheng wrote: > Hi, > > Here is the follow on patch for this problem. Please apply this from > the top of the tree and rebuild. With the patch from Chris and then the patch from you combined, the previous error disappeared, but I get another error, reduced to this: ./cc1 -fpreprocessed libgcc2.i -quiet -dumpbase libgcc2.c -mtune=pentiumpro -auxbase-strip libgcc/./_clz.o -g -O2

I notice that there's a lot of inconsistency in the various LLVM classes with respect to convenience methods. Here's some examples: For creating GEPS, IRBuilder has: CreateGEP (2 overloads) CreateInBoundsGEP (2 overloads) CreateConstGEP1_32 CreateConstInBoundsGEP1_32 CreateConstGEP2_32 CreateConstInBoundsGEP2_32 CreateConstGEP1_64 CreateConstInBoundsGEP1_64

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I notice that there's a lot of inconsistency in the various LLVM classes > with respect to convenience methods. Here's some examples: > > For creating GEPS, IRBuilder has: > > CreateGEP (2 overloads) > CreateInBoundsGEP (2 overloads) > CreateConstGEP1_32 >

On Jul 7, 2010, at 5:47 AM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: >> >> Does this also apply to two different variables? say >> int z x y; >> z = x ^ y; >> If ConstantFoldBinaryInstruction also folds x ^ y into z, should this >> pass (which uses ConstantFold) also initialize x and y with a same >> initial value? Otherwise at runtime z may not be 0. > > I guess

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Jianzhou Zhao <jianzhou at seas.upenn.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jul 6, 2010, at 3:37 PM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: >> >>> Which semantics is better? I guess both are fine because if we assume >>> these two def's are same, then it is 0 as

On Jul 6, 2010, at 3:37 PM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > Which semantics is better? I guess both are fine because if we assume > these two def's are same, then it is 0 as > 'ConstantFoldBinaryInstruction', while if we assume they are different > then it is equal to undef. But the second case seems to include the > first one. If we let undef xor undef to be undef, later we can

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2010, at 5:47 AM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > >>> >>> Does this also apply to two different variables? say >>>   int z x y; >>>   z = x ^ y; >>> If ConstantFoldBinaryInstruction also folds x ^ y into z, should this >>> pass (which uses

Let me clarify my question. I have a struct array h1 as follows: dhash h1[10]; I want to get a Constant* to variable h1. It looks like I can use ConstantStruct::get(StructType*, ArrayRef<Constant *>) to do this. My question is how to get the second argument of type ArrayRef<Constant *> from the above variable h1. Thanks, Chaitra ________________________________ From: Tim Northover

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 6, 2010, at 3:37 PM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > >> Which semantics is better? I guess both are fine because if we assume >> these two def's are same, then it is 0 as >> 'ConstantFoldBinaryInstruction', while if we assume they are different >> then it is equal to

Hi, At line 2292, lib/VMCore/ConstantFold.cpp (llvm2.7 release) Constant *llvm::ConstantFoldBinaryInstruction(unsigned Opcode, Constant *C1, Constant *C2) { ... // Handle UndefValue up front. if (isa<UndefValue>(C1) || isa<UndefValue>(C2)) { switch (Opcode) { case Instruction::Xor: if (isa<UndefValue>(C1)

Talin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com > <mailto:viridia at gmail.com>> wrote: > > I notice that there's a lot of inconsistency in the various LLVM > classes with respect to convenience methods. Here's some examples: > > For creating GEPS, IRBuilder has: > > CreateGEP (2 overloads) >

>The type you pass to GlobalVariable's constructor for that variable should be "[10 x %struct.dlist]" because that's what you want storage for. Then the GlobalVariable itself will be a Constant of type "[10 x %struct.dlist]*". Yes, I verified that this is the case. I enabled assertions and the error seems to occur while creating GlobalVariable for both struct dhash

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Talin wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com >> <mailto:viridia at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I notice that there's a lot of inconsistency in the various LLVM >> classes with respect to convenience methods. Here's some

Heyho, Recently I tried out the ORCv2 JIT, especially the LLJIT. I gotta say, that I really like the new interface and the way you use it! However there is one thing I'm missing. I wrote a small bit code file, which should force having a global constructor. int wuff(); __declspec(noinline) int miau() { printf("Huhuhu"); return wuff(); } const int x = miau(); When I

It seems that the contents of Constant{Array,Struct,etc} are immutable after construction. The only available accessor function is getValues(), which returns a constant reference to a vector of uses. I have the following situation. I am building global (static) array of structs. Hence, I build a vector of ConstantStruct pointers to give to the ConstantArray constructor, etc. However, I have

Hi Óscar, Thank you for your prompt reply. Unfortunately, I still need more guidance as using the Demo page to generate C++ code didn't result in a global variable being used. Basically, I'm following your advice to use a LoadInst: Value *v = new LoadInst(result, "", theBasicBlock); Function *myfn = cast<Function>(v); I was not sure how I could get a BasicBlock for the