similar to: [LLVMdev] Unreachable code executed crash

On 5 May 2010 17:12, Adarsh Yoga <ayoga at umail.iu.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I've written a pass that basically does some code transformations to > enable parallel execution of loops. After the transformation llvm runs > BitCode Writer pass , which is aborting with Unreachable Executed error. > I have attached the input llvm code and the output llvm code for reference.

Yes. Intially the pass was crashing when the module when the module verifier was running. I was able to solve that and now it is crashing when the bit writer pass is running. On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote: > On 5 May 2010 17:12, Adarsh Yoga <ayoga at umail.iu.edu> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've written a pass

I was able to solve that but still crashing with the same error saying "Unreachable executed". I have attached the output with this mail. Thanks in advance. On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Adarsh Yoga wrote: > >> Yes. Intially the pass was crashing when the module when the module >> verifier was running. I was able to

Initially, tt was not a problem with the verifier, we were just inserting a wrong instruction in our pass. Also we were able to figure out the error you pointed out and our pass is running as intended!!! Thanks a lot. On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Adarsh Yoga wrote: > >> I was able to solve that >> > > What was wrong? I

Adarsh Yoga wrote: > I was able to solve that What was wrong? I wasn't able to reproduce it and would still like to teach the verifier whatever it missed. but still crashing with the same error saying > "Unreachable executed". I have attached the output with this mail. This time you've got: %1 = load i32** getelementptr inbounds ({ i32* }* @structobj, i64 0, i32

Adarsh Yoga wrote: > Yes. Intially the pass was crashing when the module when the module > verifier was running. I was able to solve that and now it is crashing > when the bit writer pass is running. The output is wrong in @thread_pool_init: <stdin>:44:27: error: '%4' defined with type 'i1' %5 = getelementptr i32* %4, i64 %indvar ; <i32*> [#uses=1]

John, Thanks, this would work. But we are interested in obtaining the instruction that defines/allocates the value of interest. Once we obtain that we can use LoopInfo pass to check whether the basic block containing that definition instruction belongs to the loop in question. Is there a method that returns the defining instruction? Thanks, Adarsh On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:05 AM, John Criswell

Is there a way to insert a function at the start of a module rather than inserting it at the end, which happens by default? -- Adarsh Yoga Graduate Student, Computer Science Indiana University, Bloomington -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100502/30f9e9d4/attachment.html>

Rohith Goparaju wrote: > Hi , > > I'm working on a project in which i need to find out all free > variables in a loop. I need to find all variables used inside a loop > and that are not declared(allocated) in the loop. I'm confused about > what symbol tables to use to get hold of such variables. When you say "variables," are you talking about LLVM virtual

Hi , I'm working on a project in which i need to find out all free variables in a loop. I need to find all variables used inside a loop and that are not declared(allocated) in the loop. I'm confused about what symbol tables to use to get hold of such variables. Thanks, Rohith. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, I am parsing through each instruction and for each value in the instruction, I want the instruction that is defining/allocating the value being used here (the dominator instruction). Is there a method to do that? -- Adarsh Yoga Graduate Student, Computer Science Indiana University, Bloomington -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, I've written a pass that basically does some code transformations to enable parallel execution. After the transformation llvm runs BitCode Writer pass , which is aborting with Unreachable Executed error. What does this error generally mean?. Any pointers on how to go about debugging this. Thanks, Rohith. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

Hi Adarsh, On 11/02/12 09:47, Adarsh Konchady wrote: > My pass in LLVM generates an IR like this > %5 = icmp eq i32 %4, 0 > %7 = or i1 %5, %5 > ;. . . > Since the 'or' instruction is actually not needed(dead code), I replaced all > occurences of %7 with %5. > Now, the 'or' instruction should get deleted. How can I call Dead Code > Elimination pass

Hi Adarsh, to my knowledge there is no publicly available CUDA-Frontend for LLVM yet. The work of Helge Rhodin you mentioned is on the backend-side: It allows to generate PTX code from LLVM IR. It is still being maintained, although I think the currently available source code is a little outdated. There is also a PTX backend in the current version of LLVM that makes use of LLVM's

Run the verifier pass after your pass. The bitcode readers and writers assume that the IR is well-formed, which yours may not be. Reid On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Rohith Goparaju <rgoparaj at umail.iu.edu> wrote: > Hi, > >   I've written a pass that basically does some code transformations to > enable parallel execution. After the transformation llvm runs BitCode

My pass in LLVM generates an IR like this %5 = icmp eq i32 %4, 0 %7 = or i1 %5, %5 ;. . . Since the 'or' instruction is actually not needed(dead code), I replaced all occurences of %7 with %5. Now, the 'or' instruction should get deleted. How can I call Dead Code Elimination pass of LLVM from my pass or is there any method to remove that 'or' instruction? Thank you.

Hi, Please let me know how to follow my pass in LLVM by Dead Code Elimination pass of LLVM. getAnalysisUsage(...) only allows me to run passes before my pass. I want to run Dead Code Elimination pass after my pass. Regards, Adarsh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi Adarsh, > I have used the follwing command, > opt -load LLVComMan.so -ComMan -memdep -tbaa -mem2reg maptest.ll -S > What option other than -mem2reg should be included in this case to get the > right results? Does the order in which I specify the optimizations to be run > make a difference? what is in maptest.ll? Ciao, Duncan.

I have used the follwing command, opt -load LLVComMan.so -ComMan -memdep -tbaa -mem2reg maptest.ll -S What option other than -mem2reg should be included in this case to get the right results? Does the order in which I specify the optimizations to be run make a difference? Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Adarsh, > >> I want to check if the values a and b in the program alias.

It contains the bitcode file(without any optimization) of the below program, void map(int *a) { *a=20; } int main(){ int *a=(int *)malloc(sizeof(int)); *a=15; map(a); return 0; } I want to check if the pointer operand of each store instruction aliases with the function's arguments. I have used below code for this, virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {