similar to: [LLVMdev] Instruction does not dominate all uses?

You need to insert v into the basic block before the return. Note that %calltmp is absent from the dump of the function. The verifier is complaining because it found this pointer to %calltmp, but it didn't find the definition anywhere above its use. Reid On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:04 PM, alecbenzer <alecbenzer at gmail.com> wrote: > > This has been driving me crazy. In order to

Hi, I'm currently working my way through the tutorial with LLVM 3.9.1 on Windows (finished chapter 4) and stumbled over a few things which could be improved: - "LLVMContext" does not exist as a variable -> "TheContext" - Chapter 3: 5 times - Chapter 4: 1 time - Chapter 5: 4 times - Chapter 6: 2 times - Chapter 7: 2 times 3.4. Function Code

In http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/LangImpl4.html#jit there's an example that optimizes calls to functions without side effects. Specifically, ready> extern sin(x); ready> extern cos(x); ready> def foo(x) sin(x)*sin(x) + cos(x)*cos(x); Read function definition: define double @foo(double %x) { entry: %calltmp = call double @sin(double %x) %multmp = fmul double %calltmp,

Hi Rob, You need to set attribute ReadOnly on the sin / cos functions, using Function::addFnAttr(Attribute) for example. Best regards, -- Arnaud de Grandmaison -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Rob Pieke Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 11:41 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Optimization of calls

Hi I hope this is a proper place to put my question. I've compiled Kaleidoscope from "Adding JIT and Optimizer Support" tutorial. Basically it works just fine but when I try to run extern'ed putchard function it aborts. Please, tell me what am I doing wrong? Here is more information: My PC runs FreeBSD. I've copied the toy source code exactly and didn't change it.

Hi, I am writing an alias profiler using the points-to relation. For this I'm inserting a function call of external function with the following type profile(int,int,int,void*,void*,...) I'm trying to pass the dereferenced pointer's memory address and the address of the location who are in alias set of the pointer. For this i'm using BitCastInst BitCastInst *init1= new

Chayan Sarkar wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to write a small pass. In my pass, I have inserted some > instruction and used that in another. But, during OPT it is showing > "Instruction does not dominate all uses" like following - > > %b.1 = bitcast i32 4 to i32 ; <i32> [#uses=8] %11 > = add i32 %a.1, %b.1 ;

Hello All, I am instrumenting IR to pass addres of the function to runtime but I am getting error - Instruction does not dominate all uses. I used M.dump() to get below dump, not able to figure out what I am doing wrong. Any help would be much appreciated. define dso_local double @mysqrt(double %val1) local_unnamed_addr #0 { entry: %0 = bitcast double (double)* @mysqrt to i8* %1 = call

Hi, I am trying to write a small pass. In my pass, I have inserted some instruction and used that in another. But, during OPT it is showing "Instruction does not dominate all uses" like following - %b.1 = bitcast i32 4 to i32 ; <i32> [#uses=8] %11 = add i32 %a.1, %b.1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]Instruction does not dominate all uses! Any

Hi, I am working on a pass aimed to unify multiple exits of a loop into a unique basic block. The approach is straight forward: I create a unique BasicBlock BB_unique that has as predecessors all the exit blocks of the loop, it contains a phi instruction and a switch to redirect the flow correctly. Additionally, for each initial exit block I create an associated block that will jump to the

Okay, I've think I understand now. By using a "Value" object (like a function call) in another instruction does nothing more than use a reference to that value. It is still my responsibility to ensure that value/reference is actually created prior to its use in the block. On 02/11/12 12:16, Nick Lewycky wrote: > edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: >> I'm having trouble figuring

Hi all, I'm getting this error: "Virtual register defs don't dominate all uses". It comes from llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineVerifier.cpp:2138 I don't understand what it means. Does anyone know? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190416/f2eef252/attachment.html>

edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: > I'm having trouble figuring out what the error "Instruction does not > dominate all uses!" means. I'm trying to construct a call to a function > with two parameters. The printed IR, with error, looks like this: > > define i32 @add(i32, i32) { > EntryBlock: > %2 = add i32 %0, %1 > ret i32 %2 > } > > define i32

On Oct 11, 2010, at 9:05 AM, Xinfinity wrote: > > Hi, > > I am working on a pass aimed to unify multiple exits of a loop into a unique > basic block. The approach is straight forward: > I create a unique BasicBlock BB_unique that has as predecessors all the exit > blocks of the loop, it contains a phi instruction and a switch to redirect > the flow correctly.

BB: %4= load i32* @"FB" %5 = icmp ne i32 %4, 0 br i1 %5, label %BB1, label %BB2 The error after $clang -pthread MyNew.ll -o MyNew Instruction does not dominate all uses! Could you help for this ? -- * Rasha Salah Omar Msc Student at E-JUST Demonestrator at Faculty of Computers and Informatics Benha University* * e-mail: rasha.omar at ejust.edu.eg*

I came across this: shouldn't the last value be a more exact zero? It did not do that with 1 - sum( rep(0.1, 10) ) > 1 - cumsum( rep(0.1, 10) ) [1] 9.000000e-01 8.000000e-01 7.000000e-01 6.000000e-01 5.000000e-01 4.000000e-01 3.000000e-01 2.000000e-01 [9] 1.000000e-01 1.110223e-16 > version _ platform

On 5/2/11 11:59 AM, Chuck Zhao wrote: > I am having difficulty in replicating a sequence of instructions (2+, > with def-use dependencies within) and inserting them at a different > location. > > I have tried a few different approaches (IRBuilder, new Instruction(), > I->clone(), insertBefore/insertAfter,etc.), all leading to the same > error msg: > "Instruction

I'm having trouble figuring out what the error "Instruction does not dominate all uses!" means. I'm trying to construct a call to a function with two parameters. The printed IR, with error, looks like this: define i32 @add(i32, i32) { EntryBlock: %2 = add i32 %0, %1 ret i32 %2 } define i32 @eval_expr() { EntryBlock: ret i32 <badref> } Instruction does not dominate

Hi Tim, Instruction does not dominate all uses! %5 = icmp ne i32 %4, 0 br i1 %5, label %BB1, label %BB2 Broken module found, compilation aborted! On 8 September 2013 11:58, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Rasha, > > > Instruction does not dominate all uses! > > There should be two instructions printed after that message. The first > defines

Hi Rasha, > Instruction does not dominate all uses! There should be two instructions printed after that message. The first defines a value used by the second, but the message means there's some path through your function that can reach the second inst (the use) without the value being defined by the first instruction. At its simplest you probably want to decide what that value should be