similar to: [LLVMdev] Extending FunctionType

On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: > Hi all, > > I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In > particular, I want to > ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and > argsv. However > there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: > llvm::Function::getFunctionType() returns a > a reference to a const object,

2011/2/28 John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>: > On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In > particular, I want to > ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. > However > there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: >

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 5:10 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 2/28/11 10:04 AM, Frits van Bommel wrote: >> I don't think a full clone is necessary, since he wants to replace the >> function. He only needs to create the new function and splice in the >> body of the old one. > > That is exactly what MakeFunctionClone() does.  It creates a

On 2/28/11 10:04 AM, Frits van Bommel wrote: > 2011/2/28 John Criswell<criswell at illinois.edu>: >> On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In >> particular, I want to >> ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. >>

Dear All, I need your help urgently I have to copy the CFG of each function using CloneFunction or CloneFunctionInto. After I made the copy function. Print the basic blocks then get this error : While deleting: i32 % Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: %mul2_ = mul nsw i32 %6, 3 Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: store i32 3, i32* %x_, align 4 opt: Value.cpp:75: virtual

I haven't found much on S4 class redefinition; the little I've seen indicates the following is to be expected: 1. setClass("foo", ....) 2. create objects of class foo. 3. execute the same setClass("foo", ...) again (source the same file). 4. objects from step 2 are now NULL. Is that the expected behavior (I ran under R 2.7.1)? Assuming it is, it's kind of

Does cloning copies the function with its address or it constructs a new address to the new function? Is this real copying for the CFG or just opaque one to do some work? If it's not real copying, please I need a method that can help me in copying the function in another with new pointer to another address. Please I need answer urgent Thanks On 29 May 2013 10:14, Rasha Omar <rasha.sala7

I'm now writing a pass and I wanna ask a question about how to duplicate the function and add duplicated arguments in llvm, for example: func(int a, char *b) -> func(int a, char *b, int a1, char *b1) I'm now stuck at using "getOrInsertFunction" and how to handle "getArgumentList", please share your opinion, thanks a lot! James

All, I'm seeing duplication of DICompileUnits in a pass that worked in 3.8. I assume I'm doing something wrong. Would someone be willing to point me in the right direction? The below minimized pass reproduces my issue in 4.0 with the following error: DICompileUnit not listed in llvm.dbg.cu !1707 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C_plus_plus, file: !1, producer: "clang

Hi all, Sorry for the inconvenient about the previous post. The files were not attached. So I put them here again. I am a newbie in LLVM and I am trying to replace the function like: old function || new function ============================== ========= int haha(int a) { int haha(int a, char* ID) { ===> }

Thank you. What I need to do to address this? Open an issue on bugs.llvm.org? I'm not sure what the fix needs to be in the cloner. On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > There have in the past been bugs in the cloner involving duplicate > DICompileUnits (see e.g. https://reviews.llvm.org/D29240), this one may > need a similar fix.

Hi, I've been playing around with the APFloat class lately and I came across behavior I was not expecting based on reading the implementation comments and I'm wondering if it's a bug or intentional. The behavior concerns converting an APFloat to a string and back again. In the implementation of ``APFloat::toString(...)`` you can specify ``FormatPrecision`` as 0. The method comments

Hello, I have a simple question. How to create "dummy" function which will have no functionality behind (return nothing and do nothing)? Currently I'm trying to do this: llvm::Constant* c = Module.getOrInsertFunction("dummy", FunctionThatNeedsToBeReplaced.getFunctionType()); llvm::Function* dummy = llvm::cast<llvm::Function>(c); This way I create new function that

Thank you very much for you help, Renato! I read through paper you referred and also this document - http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html Following these instructions to create successful function I run into some problems: 1) llvm::getGlobalContext() does not exists anymore? "llvm/LLVMContext.h" too? 2) creating instance of IRBuilder don't require template (from tutorial

First and foremost, excellent library - excellent work. Thank you. Now, here''s what I''m doing: <div id="wrapper"> <fieldset id="page_1"> <legend>Page</legend> <fieldset id="group_1"> Group </fieldset> <fieldset id="group_2"> Group </fieldset>

Hello, ctags(1) uses external application sort(1) for sorting the tags file. It calls it via system(3) function. Look at the /usr/src/usr.bin/ctags/ctags.c file, there are such lines here: if (uflag) { (void)asprintf(&cmd, "sort -o %s %s", outfile, outfile); if (cmd == NULL) err(1, "out of space"); system(cmd); free(cmd); cmd = NULL; } This code will be

PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter has a reference to the current MachineFunction for other purposes. Can you use MachineFunction::getRegInfo instead? Dan On Jul 8, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Gary Benson wrote: > Would it be acceptable to change MachineInstr::getRegInfo from private > to public so I can use it from > PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter? > >

Just cast both values to const TargetRegisterClass*. Evan On Jul 10, 2008, at 7:36 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> How about? >> >> const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64Bit ? &PPC:GPRCRegClass : >> &PPC:G8RCRegClass; >> unsigned TmpReg = RegInfo.createVirtualRegister(RC); > > I tried something like that yesterday: > > const

Evan Cheng wrote: > How about? > > const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64Bit ? &PPC:GPRCRegClass : > &PPC:G8RCRegClass; > unsigned TmpReg = RegInfo.createVirtualRegister(RC); I tried something like that yesterday: const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64bit ? &PPC::GPRCRegClass : &PPC::G8RCRegClass; but I kept getting this error no matter how I arranged it:

You need to insert new basic blocks and update CFG to accomplish this. There is a hackish way to do this right now. Add a pseudo instruction to represent this operation and mark it usesCustomDAGSchedInserter. This means the intrinsic is mapped to a single (pseudo) node. But it is then expanded into instructions that can span multiple basic blocks. See