similar to: [LLVMdev] ValueSymbolTable's mutators are private?

Hi Chris, I was thinking that CreateValueName() was the way to add a symbol to a symbol table. Perhaps I'm thinking about this wrong. Here's what I've got: I've got a string generated by the parser which is constant. I need to add it to the symbol table so that, on starting the second pass of my compiler, I can dump all of the string constants to be generated as code. I

On Jul 9, 2010, at 12:02 PM, Samuel Crow wrote: > Hello, > > Why are ValueSymbolTable's mutators all private? I can't seem to find a way to > add a symbol to the table without using one of them. It looks like a bug to me > since there is no way to use it otherwise. The mutators are things like Value::setName() -Chris

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

Thank you Johannes, I looked it up and it seems that we're creating one LLVMContext per compilation "unit", not sure if that matters. i.e. there's no single globally shared LLVMContext object. Is LLVMContext *the* concurrency isolation (or unit) here? On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 6:34 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote: > Do you use one llvm context or one

Hi all, I have a question regarding populating ValueSymbolTable of a Function. Is it that ValueSymbolTable is populated automatically whenever an alloca instruction is created using IRBuilder or do we need to explicitly populate?? If we need to populate explicitly, the insert method in ValueSymbolTable is private, so how can we do it? Currently, I am trying to access the symbol table as below:

subramanyam wrote: > > Hi all, > I have a question regarding populating ValueSymbolTable of a Function. > Is it that ValueSymbolTable is populated automatically whenever an alloca > instruction is created using IRBuilder or do we need to explicitly > populate?? It's maintained by LLVM for you, by Value::setName and other methods. Nick

Nick Lewycky wrote: > > > > It's maintained by LLVM for you, by Value::setName and other methods. > > Nick > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > I am getting the following error when trying to

Hi, I want to implement a simple common sub expression pass in llvm2.8 which demands replacing the uses of the redundant expressions with a temporary variable. So, to introduce new temporary variable I have inserted an AllocaInst (...) providing the name of the temporary and desired type. But whenever I am going to insert a LoadInst for that variable I am getting segmentation fault. It is

Adding llvm-dev as that might be a more suitable audience for this discussion. (& I know Lang's been playing around with the same problem in the Orc JIT, so adding him too) Is there any basis/reason to believe that the .X suffix is a better, more principled one than straight X? Is that documented somewhere as a thing the demangling tools will ignore? On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:06 PM,

It is possible to change the name of a Function with Value::setName, so this patch _could_ cause incorrect answers. You should add a test that calls setName("intrinsic.name") to make sure this keeps working, regardless of where this patch goes. You might be able to catch such events in the ValueSymbolTable and update the intrinsic ID, but I can't find an obvious place to put that

Any takers? This patch improves on the previous one by making getIntrinsicID() inline. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20091017/9406e0ad/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FastIntrinsicID-2.patch Type:

Hi Jeffrey, Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a test that checks for the old behavior would be pointless. I realize that my patch would return an unmatching intrinsicID when the function's name changes, but the real question we should ask is do we really want to be able to change the intrinsicID by changing the function's name? Also, the original Function constructor

Dear sir, Thanks for your reply. I apologize for taking a few days to reply. > Crashed how? Please see the below. > Have you turned on ASan? Not yet, but thanks for the suggestion. I guess I will try to rebuild my modified Clang+LLVM with addr. san. and see what happens. > I recommend attaching a minimal reproduction... Well, since I`m hacking on LLVM itself, this is not

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

Hello everyone ! I followed http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4976298/modern-equivalent-of-llvm-annotationmanagerin order to get annotations from my target bytecode. All the examples that I give in the following is related to the code from that link. I have `__attribute__((annotate("DS"))) int f=0;` into the target C++ program and the related IR code: @.str = private unnamed_addr

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

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

Hello, I noticed a bit of a gap in the current code for unions: a ConstantUnion cannot be written out to .ll. Hopefully I'm not stepping on Talin's toes by posting this, it's a fairly straightforward adaptation of the code for structs just above. Tim. -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. --------------

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

Hi, I started creating a small class but I'm courious about how it is working. To create a instance of my class "Partri" I write this at Rgui: x <- new("Partri", name="Gilvan") and to change the slot "name" of this instance, I write: setName(x, newname="Justino") It is not working, because when I type "x" at Rgui, it shows