similar to: [LLVMdev] how to get MachineBasicBlock of a BasicBlock

I don't think you can. The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the same as any BasicBlock values. So MachineFunction::getMachineBasicBlock( BasicBlock::{get the number} ) cannot work. I do not see much in the basic block which can identify it. So you can search for it. typedef struct findBlock {

Also note: there may be multiple MachineBasicBlock's for a single BasicBlock. - David M On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Jeff Kunkel <jdkunk3 at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think you can. > > The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, > so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the > same as any BasicBlock values.

I want to be able to do two things with LLVM (both just before code emission): 1. Insert a MachineBasicBlock just before a MachineBasicBlock. There is a function called AddPredecessor(). However, the comment says that it does not update the actual CFG. I want to redirect all CFG edges that are incoming to this MachineBasicBlock to the new one I create, and add just one outgoing edge (no branch)

Hi all, I am really stumped on a problem for long. I could not figure out why. That is why i am here. OK, here is the problem: I tried to insert a MachineBasicBlock into a function. Here is the code snippet: // insert a machine basic block with the error_label into MF and before I // Pred is the predecessor of the block to be inserted // the new basic block is inserted right before I void

On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > However, it does not remove all the critical edges. I am getting a very > weird dataflow graph (even without the Break Critical edges pass). The > dataflow generated by MachineFunction::dump() for the program below is > given here: > http://compilers.cs.ucla.edu/fernando/projects/soc/images/loop_no_crit2.pdf ... > The

Dear guys, I am having problem to split edges correctly. Mostly because the new basic blocks are creating infinite loops. Could someone help me fixing the code below? It is creating assembly like this one below. Block LBB1_9 was inserted to break the critical edge between blocks LBB1_3 and LBB1_8. But it changes the semantics of the original program, because, before, LBB1_8 was falling

> If you don't want critical edges in the machine code CFG, you're going to > have to write a machine code CFG critical edge splitting pass: LLVM > doesn't currently have one. > > -Chris Hey guys, I've coded a pass to break the critical edges of the machine control flow graph. The program works fine, but I am sure it is not the right way of implementing it.

Hi I am developing some machine function pass. I want to split MachineBasicBlcok when I find some specific machine instruction. But I don't insert or delete any machine instruction. I just "simply" , "purely" split the MachineBasicBlcok. (So, I stole the idea from ARM64BranchRelaxation::splitBlockBeforeInstr.) This is my code : // I would pass call instruction to

Hi, This pass is similar to the one in BreakCriticalEdges.cpp, but it works for MachineFunction's, instead of Functions. The existence of critical edges complicates many optimizations. When doing register allocation, you don't necessarily have to remove critical edges (you can use conventional SSA-form, for instance. See "Translating Out of Static Single Assignment Form. SAS

Hi all, I am still stumped on the same bug. Did anyone try to insert MachineBasicBlock into a MachineFunction? Any advice will be appreciated. Thanks a lot in advance. ~Bin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks a lot Jeff. I changed the setNumber function call to

OK. About the error it’s a long story, so it’s probably better to pin some source code here. Below is a piece of code related to my problem, clipped from lib/Transforms/Utils/ValueMapper.cpp. I was wondering what “materialized” means here. Value *Mapper::mapBlockAddress(const BlockAddress &BA) { Function *F = cast<Function>(mapValue(BA.getFunction())); // F may not have

The diff is not only the && and || but also the leading !: diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp index 58f029fbe9fc..7ee06fc153b2 100644 --- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp +++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ void SelectionDAGISel::CodeGenAndEmitDAG() {

Dear LLVM, I was wondering what's the difference between BasicBlock and MachineBasicBlock in LLVM. If I want to solve a data flow equation problem, which one should I use? Thanks, Jerry

who has purchased a V400 card from Varion ? I need some help . please help me . thanks a lot

Dear R committee: I am Renzhi, Ph.D student in computer science in the University of Missouri. I have one question for you. I try to install R in the linux server, but I don't have the root permission, is there any way to install the R locally? Thank you very much for helping me. Renzhi Cao Graduate Research Assistant Department of Computer Science University of

Thanks for such a rapid response! > Don't know about Passes in the backend, but this could be a problem of > an FunctionPassManager trying to use a ModulePass. I manually applied the patch you provided for llc (I'm using the 2.5 release of LLVM not ToT) and it fixed my compilation error. When your patch replaced the FunctionPassManager used by llc with a PassManager the error went

I searched every wine forum and wiki I could find, but there's no information on wine theming. I downloaded an *.msstyles file, and opened it with winecfg (Desktop Integration->Install theme...). Nothing changed. The style I selected didn't even get added to the list - the only option is still "(No Theme)". There was no error message. wine 0.9.8 This is the style I tried:

I've just looked at my checkout of 3.6 and it looks like the fix wasn't merged. I don't have the revision number for the fix to hand but in lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp, this: MatchFilterBB = (!FilterDAGBasicBlockName.empty() && FilterDAGBasicBlockName == FuncInfo->MBB->getBasicBlock()->getName().str());

Hi, Shuguang Feng wrote: > Thanks for such a rapid response! > >> Don't know about Passes in the backend, but this could be a problem of >> an FunctionPassManager trying to use a ModulePass. > > I manually applied the patch you provided for llc (I'm using the 2.5 > release of LLVM not ToT) and it fixed my compilation error. When your > patch replaced the

Hi all, I have a pass to break critical edges of Machine Basic Blocks, but I just discovered a bug (when compiling code for x86). The problem is 'jumpl *%reg'. I don't know how to update the jump table for this type of instruction. The code that I had (see below) does not update the jump table, and the actual branch keeps jumping to the old basic block, instead of the new.