similar to: [LLVMdev] a problem when using postDominatorTree

I'll try the trunk, as well as check my code again. If indeed it's not fixed, I'll try to post a triggering case here. Thanks for the advice~ Best, --Wenbin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tobias Grosser" <grosser at fim.uni-passau.de> To: "Wenbin Zhang" <zhangwen at cse.ohio-state.edu> Cc: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Thursday, August

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > I'll try the trunk, as well as check my code again. If indeed it's not > fixed, I'll try to post a triggering case here. > Thanks for the advice~ > Did you run the -mergereturn pass (it might also be called UnifyExitNodes in the source code)? This is the pass that ensures that each function has exactly one basic block that returns control to the

On 08/05/2010 06:46 AM, Wenbin Zhang wrote: > Hi all, > I'm using postDominatorTree to do some program analysis. My code works > well for small tests, but when I run it on real applications, the > following error occurs: > /Inorder PostDominator Tree: DFSNumbers invalid: 0 slow queries. > [1] <<exit node>> {0,21} > [2] %bb1 {1,2} > [2] %bb {3,4} > [2]

On 08/05/2010 06:00 PM, John Criswell wrote: > Wenbin Zhang wrote: >> I'll try the trunk, as well as check my code again. If indeed it's not >> fixed, I'll try to post a triggering case here. >> Thanks for the advice~ >> > > Did you run the -mergereturn pass (it might also be called > UnifyExitNodes in the source code)? This is the pass that ensures

Hi, I compile a .cpp with cmd: clang++ -emit-llvm -c -g -O0 -w pbzip2.cpp -o pbzip2.bc -lbz2 llvm-dis pbzip2.bc One function in .cpp is consumer_decompress. However, I look inside pbzip2.ll. The function name is changed to "define i8* @_Z19consumer_decompressPv(i8* %q) #0 {" Why clang adds a "_Z19" prefix and "Pv" suffix? Thanks,

Got it, thanks. But in my pass, I use function name to locate. Can I disable mangling in clang? Best, Haopeng On 3/1/15 10:44 PM, John Criswell wrote: > On 3/1/15 11:38 PM, Haopeng Liu wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I compile a .cpp with cmd: >> clang++ -emit-llvm -c -g -O0 -w pbzip2.cpp -o pbzip2.bc -lbz2 >> llvm-dis pbzip2.bc >> >> One function in .cpp is

On 03/07/2010 11:09 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy wrote: > Hi! Hi Jochen, > I'd like to find the point where the control flow joins after a branch. > > e.g. if I have the following function > > if (a< b) > foo1(); > else > foo2(); > bar(); > > Then the control flow splits at the basic block containing a< b with > a branch as terminator

In addition to the major points that others made: if you care about speed, don't use compression. With today's fast disks it's an order of magnitude slower to use compression: > d=lapply(1:10, function(x) as.integer(rnorm(1e7))) > system.time(saveRDS(d, file="test.rds.gz")) user system elapsed 17.210 0.148 17.397 > system.time(saveRDS(d,

Hi, I am dealing with very large datasets and it takes a long time to save a workspace image. The options to save compressed data are: "gzip", "bzip2" or "xz", the default being gzip. I wonder if it's possible to include the pbzip2 (http://compression.ca/pbzip2/) algorithm as an option when saving. "PBZIP2 is a parallel implementation of the bzip2

Hi Andrew, Thanks a lot. But the function "DT->dominate(A,B)" decides the dominance relationship through comparing the DFS numbers, right? At least, in my example, when I check whether the newly split node (i.e., % *for.end.split*) DOMINATES the original node (I.e., %for.end), the answer is true, which is obviously wrong. Paul On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Andrew Trick

Hi Fellows, I am writing a pass that requires the DominatorTree pass. In the runOnFunction of my own pass, I call llvm::SplitBlock to split a block (%for.end) at it's first insert point. Then, when I dump my dominator tree immediately after, I can see the newly split %for.end.split, but its DFSNumIn and DFSNumOut are not properly updated in llvm::SplitBlock (i.e., still the initialized

Hi all, I'm new to llvm and klee. Now I'm trying to build up coreutil with klee. Following the steps online (http://klee.llvm.org/TestingCoreutils.html), I went to step 3 and stuck. When I try to run: klee --libc=uclibc --posix-runtime ./cat.bc -version Error occurred like: klee: error: Cannot find linker input '/lib/libc.a' klee: ModuleUtil.cpp:42: llvm::Module*

Hi Chris, Hi Josef, Hi Btrfs-List and all other Btrfs-devs that I''ve forgot, is there a chance we''ll see a xz file-compression support in Btrfs anytime soon ? I''m sure folks have been waiting for additional compression support besides gzip and lzo (bzip2 seems out of question due to its slowness, there''s pbzip2 but that''s not included in the

----- Original Message ----- From: "John Criswell" <criswell at illinois.edu> To: "Wenbin Zhang" <zhangwen at cse.ohio-state.edu> Cc: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:09 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] how to check whether from basicblock A we can go to basicblock B within the same function? > Wenbin Zhang wrote: >> Dear all,

Hello Everyone,   This is my first attempt to do something in R. As a precursor to a Willingness to Pay analysis, I want to conduct a Mixed Conditional Logit analysis but am unsure how to proceed because of some nesting within my data.   Below is some data and code that illustrate what I’m trying to do. The data are based on responses to a conjoint survey obtained during pilot testing. In the

Hi, I've been testing different methods and I'd like to have some advice. I want to perform a cold backup once a week on the Oracle DB, and put it on tape. I'm using EMC Networker for backup software, and I am not too at ease with the fact of doing eveything with Networker, because if there is a problem with the backup, the Oracle DB might not come up after the backup run. So

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Criswell" <criswell at illinois.edu> > To: "Wenbin Zhang" <zhangwen at cse.ohio-state.edu> > Cc: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:09 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] how to check whether from basicblock A we can go to > basicblock B within the same

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > Dear all, > Is there a way to check whether we can go from A to B within a > function when I'm writing a pass? I assume you are asking whether control flow can pass from BasicBlock A to BasicBlock B. In that case, yes: all you need to do is look at the terminator instruction of BasicBlock A and see if it can branch to BasicBlock B. There's a new indirect

Hi all, Can we map an IR instruction to the correlated source code? Or, if I want to recognize an assignment statement in the source code, can we quickly find all the related IR instructions according to a 'store'? E.g., i = j +k + m[5] in IR will have some loads and some getelementptrs. Can we define which IRs are related to this assignment? Thanks. Regards, --Wenbin --------------

Hi all, I'm reading the language reference of LLVM here: http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#i_getelementptr In the first example, it shows that the generated IR is supposed to be something like: %reg = getelementptr %ST* %s, i32 1, i32 2, i32 1, i32 5, i32 13 But when I copied the code and compile it myself (using v2.7), I got five getelementptr instructions, which are just like the equivalent