similar to: [LLVMdev] Anomaly with CallGraph construction

Hi Gabriel, ... > Summarizing, I have two questions: 1) is the CallGraph analysis "working as > intended" here?; and 2) what would be the correct approach > to modifying the proposed analysis in order to detect that randlc() is being > called in that CallInst ? the reason that the callgraph analysis does not try to understand indirect calls like this is that other passes

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com> wrote: > Hi lx, Philip > > I've seen an instcombine which helps with this situation. It fires when > the function types on both sides of the bitcast have the same number of > operands and compatible types. It then adds bitcasts on the arguments and > removes the one on the called function. > It

The current BasicCallGraph will miss call sites like this: %tmp86 = call i8* (...)* bitcast (i8* ()* @find_ispell to i8* (...)*)( ) ; <i8*> [#uses=1] Here the direct user of @find_ispell is a ConstantExpr. I added several lines of code to address this case. Below is the output of command: svn diff lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraph.cpp Attached is LLVM asm files with such function calls.

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > The current BasicCallGraph will miss call sites like this: > %tmp86 = call i8* (...)* bitcast (i8* ()* @find_ispell to i8* (...)*)( ) > ; <i8*> [#uses=1] > > Here the direct user of @find_ispell is a ConstantExpr. > I added several lines of code to address this case. > Below is the output of command: svn diff

Hi, I did a little experiment, basically to extract implemented CallGraph to be a "new" pass with different registered name, and run the "new" pass, but the result always gives out Segmentation Fault... I am probably missing sth? Implemented another new class, class BasicCallGraph2 : public ModulePass, public CallGraph { ..... ... } The inside code is exact same as

Shuying Liang wrote: > Hi, > > I did a little experiment, basically to extract implemented CallGraph > to be a "new" pass with different registered name, and run the "new" > pass, but the result always gives out Segmentation Fault... I am > probably missing > sth? > > Implemented another new class, > class BasicCallGraph2 : public ModulePass,

I am doing inter-procedural static analysis, so I need to do DFS of call graph. llvm-gcc sometimes generates this kind of call instruction, which cause the call graph to be incomplete. But thanks for your information, instcombine really solves the problem. On 7/17/07, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > > The current

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > I am doing inter-procedural static analysis, so I need to do DFS of call > graph. llvm-gcc sometimes generates this kind of call instruction, which > cause the call graph to be incomplete. > > But thanks for your information, instcombine really solves the problem. Happy to help. You'll probably find that other optimizations help as

Philip, I post here because I think AlwaysInliner should inline it. I want to detect the indirect calls for Inliner, and I want to hear inputs. let me define indirect call first in my idea. In one single expression, one function may be subject to bitcast more than one time. we can detect this situation and treat it as a regular call of last function, is that okay? thanks, --lx On Mon, Jan 5,

The follwing is a snippet of code to find some indirect calls in a module, which I learned from TopDownClosure.cpp: void FPS::repairCallGraph(Module &M) { CompleteBUDataStructures &DS = getAnalysis<CompleteBUDataStructures>(); for (Module::iterator f = M.begin(); f != M.end(); ++f ) { if( f->isExternal() ) continue; for (Function::iterator I = f->begin(); I !=

Hi All, I tried to use CallGraph in llvm by adding "AU.addRequired<CallGraph>();" in getAnalysisUsage function. But it reports an error: include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:56:39: error: ‘ID’ is not a member of ‘llvm::CallGraph’ return addRequiredID(PassClass::ID); How to use it correctly? Thanks, Haopeng

I am finding some weird behavior in the CallGraph, and am not sure what am I doing wrong. When trying to traverse nodes in the CallGraph I get stuck in nodes representing external functions. Take the following code: ----- #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf( "Hello World!\n" ); } ----- If I try to traverse the CallGraph using the following code: ----- CallGraph CG

Hello, I have a simple program using aliases to functions, and it seems that the CallGraph doesn't follow these aliases. Here is the example: @alias = alias void ()* @realfunc define void @realfunc() { entry: ret void } define i32 @main() { entry: call void @alias() ret i32 0 } ******* Output of the CallGraph ******* Call graph node <<null

Hi, There is a "Root" private member in CallGraph <http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/CallGraph_8h_source.html#l00192> class. But there is no way to get access to that member. How can I do that? I can get CallGraphNode of "main" method. But I am curious is there more cleaner way. Thanks, Riyad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

Hello, I want an instance of CallGraph in my pass. By looking at -dot-callgraph source, I've tried something like this: CallGraphWrapperPass *CGWP = new CallGraphWrapperPass(); PM.add(CGWP); CallGraph *CG = &CGWP->getCallGraph(); PM.add(new MyPass(CG)); I get the following error: /home/riyad/installs/llvm-3.7.0/include/llvm/PassSupport.h:95:38: error: no matching constructor for

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jianfei Hu <hujianfei258 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > I want to traverse CallGraph > > code segment: > > > virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const > { > AU.addRequired<CallGraph>(); > } > > virtual

Hi all, I would like to create a Pass that given an IR instruction walks starting from that instruction up to the main function to identify all the functions call that have been made to call that instruction. Is it possible? What kind of Pass should I create? Thanks Best, Simone Simone Atzeni simone.at at gmail.com +1 (801) 696-8373

Hello, I want to traverse CallGraph code segment: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<CallGraph>(); } virtual bool runOnModule(Module &F) { CallGraph &g = getAnalysis<CallGraph>(); for ( CallGraph::iterator i = g.begin(); i != g.end(); i++) { errs()<<"-----------------\n";

Hi All, It seems that functions in callgraph remove all metadata info, such as dbg. Can I keep metadata in callgraph? Best, Haopeng

Hello: We are working with LLVM-3.1 and we have a problem.This is the code we have executed: virtual void getAnalysisUsage( llvm::AnalysisUsage & info ) const { info.addRequired<CallGraph>(); ... } ... virtual bool runOnModule( Module & M ) { ... CallGraph &CG = this->getAnalysis<CallGraph>(); CallGraphNode *cgn; unsigned nref;