Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses."
2011 May 04
2
[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses.
Thanks for the response. I do have assertions enabled, and none of
them are getting hit. I did do a search of the mailing list for the
past year (approximately) before writing my email, and what I found
was that you should be allowed to use LoopInfo and other analysis
function passes from a module pass, with the only difference being
that getAnalysis is passed the function. The example code I
2011 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses.
Hi Michael,
> When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault
> where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and
> DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will
> segfault.
I suggest you build LLVM with assertions enabled - then you should get a
helpful error message rather than a segfault. I think you are not allowed
to
2011 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses.
Hi Michael, hi Duncan,
yesterday I stumbled over something that might be related.
At least I could also just be doing some initialization wrong or
something in this direction...
In my case, I hit a segfault in PassInfo::isAnalysisGroup() after
PassManager.add(myModulePass) is called.
My setup seems fairly simple, the attached code should reproduce the error.
Compile with
g++ test.cpp
2011 May 04
1
[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses.
Your constructor is not calling initializeTestMPPass(), and you're
using RegisterPass which I think was deprecated in favor of
INITIALIZE_PASS. You can look at, for example,
lib/Transforms/Scalar/IndVarSimplify.cpp for examples of how to
initialize, e.g. having "INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LoopInfo)"
sandwiched between BEGIN and END. Note that you'll want a forward
declaration of
2011 May 17
0
[LLVMdev] 2.9 segfault when requesting for both LoopInfo and DominatorTree analyses.
Hi,
I am running into the same issue with a module pass, that calls
LoopInfo.(does not call DominatorTree)
I am using RegisterPass, since it is a dynamically loaded module(as per
lib/Transforms/Hello)
It does seem possible from the discussion, to use LoopInfo inside a
ModulePass.
I am wondering what the fix to this problem was.
Also, the code works in 2.7.(I did not try 2.8)
Thanks,
Arushi
2011 Dec 14
2
[LLVMdev] Adding dependency on MemoryDependenceAnalysis pass to LICM causes opt to get stuck in addPass
I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using
intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in
LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this :
virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.setPreservesCFG();
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();
2011 Dec 14
0
[LLVMdev] Adding dependency on MemoryDependenceAnalysis pass to LICM causes opt to get stuck in addPass
On Dec 14, 2011, at 7:09 AM, David Gardner wrote:
> I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using
> intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in
> LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this :
>
> virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
> AU.setPreservesCFG();
>
2011 Aug 22
1
[LLVMdev] Infinite loop when adding a new analysis pass
I am trying to add an analysis pass as a FunctionPass, and let LICM
(LoopPass) depends upon it. So in LICM.cpp, I have the following:
virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.setPreservesCFG();
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();
AU.addRequiredID(LoopSimplifyID);
AU.addRequired<AliasAnalysis>();
2012 Mar 21
0
[LLVMdev] llvm seg fault when specifying addRequiredTransitive in module pass
Hi all,
I am using llvm to perform some static analysis with a module pass. In
getAnalysisUsage(), I specified some required passes by:
addRequiredTransitive<LoopInfo>();
When I run my pass using opt, it crashes with segmentation fault with
callstack:
#0 0x0877aebd in llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage
(this=0x8c10934, P=0xb15b988) at PassManager.cpp:573
#1 0x0877aa9b in
2011 Nov 08
4
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
Just shows me what I expect
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
So I'm only using it for DominatorTree(so I can use PromoteMemToReg).
Thanks
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
> On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to keep dragging
2011 Nov 08
2
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
I still have the addRequired:
virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
}
The other line
DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Michael Ilseman <michael at lunarg.com> wrote:
> Something's
2011 Nov 08
2
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion
failed: (ResultPass && "getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was
not " "'required' by pass!"), function getAnalysisID
But I already have:
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
}
And changed the bottom of my pass too:
char Hello::ID =
2011 May 30
1
[LLVMdev] about writing a functionpass requiring a modulepass
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Qingan Li <ww345ww at gmail.com>
Date: 2011/5/30
Subject:
To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Hi,
I wrote an analysis pass, myPass, inherited from both ModulePass and
ProfileInfo, and this pass requires the CallGraph, i.e.,
* class myPass : public ModulePass, public ProfileInfo { ...};*
* void myPass::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const
2011 Nov 08
0
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
Something's different here, earlier in the thread you said you had:
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
}
Now you have:
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
I'm sort of confused, why did this change happen? I think the
2011 Nov 08
0
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
On 11/8/11 4:34 PM, ret val wrote:
> I still have the addRequired:
> virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const {
> AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>();
> }
>
> The other line
> DominatorTree *dt =&getAnalysis<DominatorTree>();
> Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg
Isn't DominatorTree a
2011 Nov 09
1
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
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
2011 Nov 08
2
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
I'm writing a Pass that I would like to remain loadable by opt. The
pass also requires DominatorTree(for PromoteMemToReg).
Looking for examples the only way I found to require a dependecny is
by doing something like this:
char Hello::ID = 0;
namespace llvm { void initializeHelloPass(llvm::PassRegistry&); }
INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(Hello, "hello", "Hello
2011 Nov 08
0
[LLVMdev] loadable passes with dependencies?
On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote:
> Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion
> failed: (ResultPass&& "getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was
> not " "'required' by pass!"), function getAnalysisID
>
> But I already have:
> void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const {
>
2016 Jul 13
3
[PM] I think that the new PM needs to learn about inter-analysis dependencies...
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:25 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
2016 Jul 13
3
[PM] I think that the new PM needs to learn about inter-analysis dependencies...
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yea, this is a nasty problem.
>>>
>>> One