similar to: [LLVMdev] Breaking critical edges

Has anyone written a grammar for LLVM for ANTLR. I mean an ANTLR grammar that parses LLVM instructions. Is an LLVM grammar available for any other parsing tool? Surinder

I have written a new pass, it compiles ok but crashes when i run it with error (llvm::Pass::Pass(llvm::PassKind, intptr_t): Assertion `pid && "pid cannot be 0"' failed.). The pass is : using namespace llvm; namespace { struct Dfl : public FunctionPass { static char ID; Dfl() : FunctionPass(ID) { } virtual bool runOnFunction(Function &F) { bool

I am creating a new pass (function pass) called Dfl from the Hello example and notes on "Writing an LLVM Pass". When I compile the program I get inncomplete type error (llvm/include/llvm/Pass.h:188: error: incomplete type 'llvm::DominatorTree' used in nested name specifier). The code is given below. Surinder struct Dfl : public FunctionPass { raw_ostream *Out; static

Hi Sam, Thanks for your reply. I am implementing my research (http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~suri/Detecting%20Buffer%20Over.pdf), a translation of LLVM to a simple non-deterministic language to detect buffer overflows. It involves (1) printing a control flow graph of basic blocks of a function (easily done) (2) translating each llvm statement to a corresponding data flow language (needs ASTs to

I have a pointer to a basic block and am iterating thru its predecessor blocks. I want to get a pointer to the predecessor block. How do I do it. I am using following code and it given compile time errors. error: cannot convert 'llvm::const_pred_iterator' to 'const llvm::BasicBlock*' in initialization const BasicBlock *b = PH->getParent(); // process all pred block

llvm/include/llvm/Pass.h:93: llvm::Pass::Pass(llvm::PassKind, intptr_t): Assertion `pid && "pid cannot be 0"' failed. On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Surinder <surifilms at gmail.com> wrote: > I have written a new pass, it compiles ok but crashes when i run it > with error (llvm::Pass::Pass(llvm::PassKind, intptr_t): Assertion `pid > && "pid

Hello Surinder, The existing hand-written parser is callable from almost anywhere so the only reason you'd need to have a parser for it would be to extend it. Originally it was written using Flex and Bison but Chris Lattner rewrote it from scratch to catch more errors at the parsing stage. The only feature I've found to be missing from the existing LLVM-AS utility was an include

Hi Surinder, Did you remember to #include "llvm/Analysis/Dominators.h"? Best, Douglas On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Surinder <surifilms at gmail.com> wrote: > I am creating a new pass (function pass) called Dfl from the Hello > example and notes on "Writing an LLVM Pass". When I compile the > program I get inncomplete type error

Hi Surinder, You'll need to dereference your iterator to get a pointer: const BasicBlock *p = *pr; Cheers, Lang. On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Surinder <surifilms at gmail.com> wrote: > I have a pointer to a basic block and am iterating thru its > predecessor blocks. I want to get a pointer to the predecessor block. > How do I do it. I am using following code and it

Dear guys, I've adapted the pass in BreakCriticalEdges.cpp so I can use it before register allocation. But the pass is not changing the control flow graph of the machine function. I think it is because I am inserting the pass after the control flow graph of the machine function is built. I am inserting the pass as required by the register allocator, and I can see that the pass is

Dear guys, when the phi-elimination pass is called (after local register allocation, for example), it seems to me that the control flow graph may have critical edges. Is it true? If it is true, I would like to know more about the algorithm that you guys use to destroy phi-functions. Is there any reference? Why did not implement a machine function pass to remove critical edges? I mean, I

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > when the phi-elimination pass is called (after local > register allocation, for example), it seems to me that the control flow > graph may have critical edges. Is it true? Yes. > If it is true, I would like to know more about the > algorithm that you guys use to destroy phi-functions. Is there any > reference? Why

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

John, I have looked at the SAFECode and thought following sould work if (isa<Constant>(I.getOperand(0))) { Out << "*** operand 0 is a constant ******"; if (Instruction *operandI = dyn_cast<Instruction>(I.getOperand(0))) { Out << "********operand is an instruction ****"; if (GetElementPtrInst *gepI =

Hi, I'd like to merge mutliple dataframes from a list of dataframes by some common columns. The approach for simply merging 2 dataframes is working with: merge(df1,df2,by=c("col1","col2","col3"),all=TRUE) For mutliple dataframes in a list I try to use the merge_all command from the package reshape. The documentation states that the command takes a list of

Hi, I'm writing a ModulePass that needs critical edges split up. I have the statement AU.addRequiredID(BreakCriticalEdgesID); in my getAnalysisUsage() but the pass never gets executed. I guess I have to request pass execution for each function, but I can't get behind how to do that, since there is no analysis group for that kind of transformation. Thanks, Andi

When I compile C programs into llvm, it produces load instructions in two different flavours. (1) %8 = load i8** %bp, align 8 (2) %1 = load i8* getelementptr inbounds ([4 x i8]* @.str, i64 0, i64 0), align 1 I know that %bp in first case and the entire "getelementptr inbounds ([4 x i8]* @.str, i64 0, i64 0)" in second case can be obtained by dump'ing I.getOperand(0)

Hi, I want to use four independent variables to predict the output of one dependent variable using a linear model lm. I want to compare all possible combinations of the 4 independent variables, including singles, pairs and triples. I was thinking of using the AIC test to compare all models and pick the best one. The model looks like this : lm(Y ~ X1 + X2 + X3 + X4) Thanks for your help

On 1/21/2011 10:46 PM, Surinder wrote: > John, > > I have looked at the SAFECode and thought following sould work > > if (isa<Constant>(I.getOperand(0))) > { Out<< "*** operand 0 is a constant ******"; > if (Instruction *operandI = dyn_cast<Instruction>(I.getOperand(0))) > { Out<<

John, I have looked at the real code (instead of the obsolete one) and it appears to be easy to find if an operand is a getelementptr instruction. if (ConstantExpr * CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(I.getOperand(0))) { Out<< "*** operand 0 is a constant Expr******"; if (CE->getOpcode() == Instruction::GetElementPtr) { Out<< "*** operand 0 is