similar to: [LLVMdev] Question on using analysis passes to do program analysis

Hi , It will be good ,If you get us the sample that assert. Thanks ~Umesh On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:40 AM, 田中 太郎 <dontforgettobringatowel at live.jp>wrote: > > Hi all, > > I ran across an assertion failure while using region analysis in my passes. > I get the same thing when doing: opt -regions -analyze > > [...] > [1] entry => if.end > End region tree

Hi all, I ran across an assertion failure while using region analysis in my passes. I get the same thing when doing: opt -regions -analyze [...]   [1] entry => if.end End region tree Printing analysis 'Detect single entry single exit regions' for function 'njDecodeSOF': Region tree: [0] entry => <Function Return>   [1] entry => return     [2] if.end => return

Guys, What I want to do is to hack global opt pass, which needs ScalarEvolution analysis. However opt crashed saying "opt: /home/xchen/llvm/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:242: AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const void*, llvm::Function&) [with AnalysisType = llvm::ScalarEvolution]: Assertion `ResultPass && "Unable to find requested analysis info"'

On 10/20/10 6:05 AM, Luke Dalessandro wrote: > I have a transformation where I'd like to use both DominatorTree (for ExtractCodeRegion), and DemoteRegisterToMemory (i.e., reg2mem). The transformation is phased, so all occurrences of getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(Function) happen before any occurrence of getAnalysisID<FunctionPass>(&DemoteRegisterToMemoryID, Function). I

Hi, I am using klee-gcc to compile 'findutils', but I don't know why the variables are all replaced with temp variables(such as %10) and instructions are reordered for optimizations, how can I generate the bytecode and reserve the program variables. I used the next commands without any optimization options: 1. $ ../configure --disable-nls CFLAGS="-g" 2. $

Tobias, Thanks for taking the time to summarize all this. It's a great writeup. I'm moving the thread to llvm-dev. My responses below. On May 21, 2012, at 5:06 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > First of all some information about the RegionInfo pass: > > ======================================================================= > The very first paper I

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

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

Hi, The klee library directory is determined at compile time and cannot be changed afterwards. Have a look at tools/klee/main.cpp to see how it is computed. I usually use Klee without any install step, right from the build directory. This has never given me the error you see. Hope this helps, Jonas On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu < alexandruionutdiaconescu at

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*

Hello everyone, I am a novice with KLEE under LLVM. I am trying to build a KLEE project (on a new LLVM environment) and I have the following problem: echo Testing... Testing... echo There should be no assertion fails! There should be no assertion fails! klee -taint=direct taint_direct.o KLEE: output directory = "klee-out-8" klee: error: Cannot find linker input

Hi Tobias, Thanks a lot for the detailed reply. I am working on several new optimizations for OpenCL kernels for a DSP architecture. The project itself has an NDA associated with it, so I cannot go into more details, but the source will be open to public after completion. One of the first steps is to serialize the work-items in a work-group (e.g., insert nested loops around REGIONs in

Hi, I'm currently trying to find and fix memory leaks (compiling with ``-fsanitize=address``) in the KLEE tool [1] an having found some leaks and I'm having trouble suppressing them. I'm trying to suppress them using the ``-fsanitize-blacklist=blacklist.txt`` option as documented at [2]. I'm using Clang 3.7 ( Arch Linux package 3.7.0-6). The sort of reported leaks I see are ```

Hi, I had a question about this as well. The documentation about writing a pass shows an example like what John wrote, calling a function pass within a module pass on a per function basis. However, if I code it that way, I still get the same error: opt: /x/jeffhao/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:232: AnalysisType& llvm::Pass::getAnalysisID(const llvm::PassInfo*,

On 03/16/2010 05:02 PM, James Stanier wrote: > > Hi Trevor, > > I just studied your diagrams -- I *think* that the "control tree" of > structural analysis is not same as the "control flow tree" from your own > Java work. However, as you understand your work more than I do, I present > you with some fancy coloured diagrams that I drew that might help you

Awesome, that let me get far enough to trip: Assertion failed: (ResultPass && "Unable to find requested analysis info"), function getAnalysisID Is there something else I forgot? On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:47 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 11/8/11 4:34 PM, ret val wrote: >> >> I still have the addRequired: >>         virtual

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) { >> >>

Hi Tobias, My RegionSimplify pass adds new exit node for refined regions to convert them into simple region. However, the RegionInfo pass does not seem to recognize those changes. For example, in the attached file, bb4.region is supposed to be in the first region. My RegionExtractor pass required the extracted region to be simple. Should we modify RegionInfo or is their away to preserve the

Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com> writes: >> > Which regression tests are failing with LLVM 2.8 and GCC 4.4.x? >> >> Too many to list. > > Can you give me 2 or 3 examples (that fail with LLVM 2.8 and GCC 4.4 > but work with LLVM 2.8 and GCC 4.3), also I'd like to know how they > fail. > If I have some time I'll check with my 4.4 to see if

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>(); > ...... >