Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]"
2010 Apr 11
2
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Can someone help me with error while i make my own pass]
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in>
Subject: [LLVMdev] Can someone help me with error while i make my own pass
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:40:25 +0530
Size: 4901
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100411/33876147/attachment.eml>
2010 Apr 12
1
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Can someone help me with error while i make my own pass]
Tried that but still no success
Chris Lattner wrote:
> Try doing a clean build, then doing 'make ENABLE_PIC=1'
>
> -Chris
>
> On Apr 11, 2010, at 9:13 AM, ambika wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> *From: *ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in <mailto:ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in>>
>> *Date: *April 8, 2010 9:10:25 AM PDT
>> *To: *llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
2010 Apr 11
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Can someone help me with error while i make my own pass]
Try doing a clean build, then doing 'make ENABLE_PIC=1'
-Chris
On Apr 11, 2010, at 9:13 AM, ambika wrote:
>
>
> From: ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in>
> Date: April 8, 2010 9:10:25 AM PDT
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: [LLVMdev] Can someone help me with error while i make my own pass
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I have added LoaderInterface pass in
2010 May 31
0
[LLVMdev] Finding Merge nodes in CFG (ambika@cse.iitb.ac.in)
hi ambika,
I am not sure about this solution as i just started working in this field.
How about taking analogy of a problem which ask us to find nearest common
parent of two nodes in a tree.
Let me know if I can be corrected.
- Anubhav
intern IIT M
B. Tech 4th year CSE
VIT University, Vellore.
On 31 May 2010 22:30, <llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> Send LLVMdev mailing list
2010 Jan 03
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Help Required for LLVM]
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in>
Subject: Help Required for LLVM
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 00:08:36 +0530
Size: 984
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100104/50013902/attachment.eml>
2010 Feb 23
1
[LLVMdev] Regarding a pass in LLVM
I have done that. I have defined createMyAnaPass() in Passes.h and it is
defined in MyAna.cpp and used in LinkAllPasses.h
But still the error :
/home/ambika/llvm/llvm-obj/tools/opt/Release/opt.o: In function `global
constructors keyed to opt.cpp':
opt.cpp:(.text+0x1e89): undefined reference to `llvm::createMyAnaPass()'
I dont understand whats the problem.
Jianzhou Zhao wrote:
>
2010 Feb 23
0
[LLVMdev] Regarding a pass in LLVM
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:17 AM, ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in> wrote:
> Thanks that helped me out.
> But now I am facing one more problem. It says :
>
> ‘llvm::ModulePass* llvm::createMyAnaPass()’ should have been declared
> inside ‘llvm’
>
> but I can find no place to declare it.
> Where should I do it.
We can do what scalar optimizations do.
All scalar passes
2010 May 08
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
But this is already present in my pass.
And I am not able to understand the cause for the error:
opt: /home/ambika/llvm_3/llvm-2.6/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:203:
AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*) const
[with AnalysisType = llvm::DominatorTree]: Assertion `ResultPass &&
"getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was not "
2010 Feb 22
0
[LLVMdev] Regarding a pass in LLVM
ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to add a pass inn LLVM, and I actually want to add it in
> source code, not just directly into object code.
>
> For that I included the lines in my file MyAna.cpp
> (llvm-2.6/lib/ana/MyAna.cpp)
>
>
> char MyAna::ID = 0;
> static RegisterPass<MyAna> X("my-aa","My Analysis");
> static
2010 Feb 23
2
[LLVMdev] Regarding a pass in LLVM
Thanks that helped me out.
But now I am facing one more problem. It says :
‘llvm::ModulePass* llvm::createMyAnaPass()’ should have been declared
inside ‘llvm’
but I can find no place to declare it.
Where should I do it.
John Criswell wrote:
> ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to add a pass inn LLVM, and I actually want to add it in
>> source
2010 Feb 10
0
[LLVMdev] Help regarding Flow of function calls in llvm
llvm itself is a plain C++ program, so you can use gdb on it. gdb
doesn't know how to step through compiled IR, yet.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 12:13 PM, ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in> wrote:
> No, this is not what I am looking for. I am looking for something like
> may be a debugger so that I can trace the function calls in source of llvm.
> llvm-db dosent work it says
2010 Jun 02
0
[LLVMdev] Duplicating a Basic Block
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 12:24 PM, ambika <ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to duplicate a set of basic blocks and finally modify the
> structure of CFG.
> But if I just duplicate a block then name of all the temporaries will
> be same as in original block.
>
> So is there a way to rename all the temporaries in a basic block or I
> will have to do
2010 May 08
3
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
Hi,
you need something like this in your pass:
void YourPass::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
}
because you need to specify which analysis you are using.
Tobi
2010 May 11
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
John Criswell wrote:
> ambika wrote:
>> Here is getAnalysisUsage() i am using,
>>
>> void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const {
>> AU.setPreservesAll();
>> AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
>> }
>>
>> and then I use it as,
>>
>>
>> bool ptrTest::runOnModule(Module&M) {
>>
>>
2010 May 09
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
Here is getAnalysisUsage() i am using,
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.setPreservesAll();
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
}
and then I use it as,
bool ptrTest::runOnModule(Module &M) {
DominatorTree &DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
......
}
John Criswell wrote:
> ambika wrote:
>> But this is already present in
2010 Jun 01
0
[LLVMdev] Finding Merge nodes in CFG
ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
> Actually I have collected some pointer information in the form [ p -> a,c
> ]. Now suppose at some node I have information as [p->a,c]. Now i want to
> find a merge node above this node where this information is actually
> geting merged.
> So if I get a merge node above this, I can check in its predecessors if
> their out has only [p->a]
2010 May 10
2
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
ambika wrote:
> Here is getAnalysisUsage() i am using,
>
> void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
> AU.setPreservesAll();
> AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
> }
>
> and then I use it as,
>
>
> bool ptrTest::runOnModule(Module &M) {
>
> DominatorTree &DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
> ......
>
2010 May 09
2
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Error while running my pass with opt]
ambika wrote:
> But this is already present in my pass.
> And I am not able to understand the cause for the error:
>
Can you send a copy of your getAnalysisUsage() method for your pass?
There are some funny errors that can occur when you do things that the
PassManager cannot handle.
For example, if you're requiring a transform pass, that can cause
strange assertions from the
2010 Jun 02
1
[LLVMdev] Finding Merge nodes in CFG
Actually I am interested only if the information merges at join node,
otherwise not... So just getting a node with more than one predecessor
might help.
But can I figure out if there is a function call in between, in any of
these nodes?
Thanks a lot for helping out...
John Criswell wrote:
> ambika at cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
>> Actually I have collected some pointer information in the
2010 May 07
0
[LLVMdev] Error while running my pass with opt
Hi,
When I try to run my pass with opt , I get the following error :
opt:
/home/ambika/llvm_3/llvm-2.6/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:203:
AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*) const
[with AnalysisType = llvm::DominatorTree]: Assertion `ResultPass &&
"getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was not " "'required' by