similar to: [LLVMdev] function failing to run in Jit

Try using i64 indices with GEP > Is there any reason this generated code won't run in the Jit? > I've pretty much got everything else working for my front end > which all runs fin in the Jit but I can't get global arrays to work. > > ; ModuleID = 'test' > target datalayout = >

Hi There , Again ,I'm newbie to LLVM and please pardon me ..if you guys feel that ,the below question is very basic :) Here i go ,compiled the below sample with clang i.e *clang enum.c -S -emit-llvm* and there respective file are $ cat enum.c int main() { enum type{one=1,two,three} s; s = one; return s; } $ cat enum.s ; ModuleID = 'enum.c' target datalayout =

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi There , > > Again ,I'm newbie to LLVM  and please pardon me ..if you guys  feel that > ,the below question is very basic :) > > Here i go ,compiled the below sample with clang i.e clang enum.c -S > -emit-llvm and there respective file are > > $ cat enum.c > int main()

The following C code : #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int TESTE2( int parami , int paraml ,double paramd ) { int varx=0,vary; int nI =0; //varx= parami; if( parami > 0 ) { varx = parami; vary = varx + 1; } else { varx = vary + 1; vary = paraml; } varx = varx + parami + paraml; for( nI = 1 ; nI <= paraml; nI++) { varx =

Hi Scott, On 24/04/13 19:40, Scott Pakin wrote: > I was suprised to find that some bitcode I'm generating isn't getting > optimized. Here, I'm doing the equivalent of "myarray[5]++" (on an > "extern int *myarray"), repeated three times: does your bitcode contain data layout information? Ciao, Duncan. > > @myarray = external global i32* >

Hi all, I'm looking at following code snippet: void t2(double *x) { long long a[2]; a[0] = 3; a[1] = 5; *x = * ((double *) a); *(x+1) = * ((double *) &a[a[0]-2]); } I use generate LLVM code using my own front-end that looks like: ; ModuleID = 'jb.c' target datalayout =

In the creation of dynamic languages we often have to box values together. For instance, take the following expression: IntObj c = sqrt((a*a)+(b*b)); Here, most likely, a bytecode interpreter would execute this as "mul_ints", "add_ints", "sqrt", etc. Inside these primitive functions we would have to unwrap our IntObj types, add the values, allocate a new object and

I am trying to compile a little intrinsic function for my machine. Here is a dump from clang-cc with --emit-llvm option: ===================== ; ModuleID = 'foo.c' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32" target triple = "i386-pc-linux-gnu" @main.i = internal global i32

Hi! When I allocate memory for a structure, in _Znwm (operator new) function I need to specify size. How can I determine this information dynamically? ; ModuleID = '/tmp/webcompile/_12211_0.bc' target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-s0:64:64-f80:128:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" target triple =

Hi Seb, I think it is an opt bug. If you run opt at -O1 then you get: define void @t2(double* nocapture %x) nounwind { L.entry: %a = alloca [2 x i64], align 8 %0 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i64]* %a, i32 0, i32 0 store i64 3, i64* %0, align 8 %1 = getelementptr [2 x i64]* %a, i32 0, i32 1 store i64 5, i64* %1, align 8 %2 = bitcast [2 x i64]* %a to double* %3 = load double*

Hi, I think this is a very simple question, and it must just be missing something. I am looking for find out how to assign a constant integer value to the variable in llvm ir. The following returns 12, and %var2 = 12. ; ModuleID = 't.c' target datalayout =

Hi all, I have a question regarding dynamic indexing into a vector with GEP. I see that in the ScalarReplAggregates pass in the LLVM 3.2 release the call SROA::isSafeGEP() will now allow alloca scalarization in the case where a GEP index into a vector isn’t a constant. My question is: what is the expected behavior when the index is out of bounds of the vector? Is it undefined? I have an

Hi Duncan, Indeed, I made same experiment as you and concluded that it might be a BUG. Shall I submit it to llvm bug tracking support ? Do you think there could be a work-around ? Thanks for your quick answer. Best Regards Seb 2012/2/28 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> > Hi Seb, I think it is an opt bug. If you run opt at -O1 then you get: > > define void @t2(double*

Hi, I'm just trying to get started with a simple example with LLVM under windows. I downloaded the mingw binaries from the website and would like to compile a program. (PS: The mingw binaries did not come with any documentation on what they are and how to use them) I used the online code generator (http://llvm.org/demo/index.cgi) to compile hello world: #include <stdio.h> int main() {

Dear all, I'm currently working on the automated program analysis tool AProVE (http://aprove.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/) and would like to use LLVM for analysis of C programs. I have the following example C program dealing with simple lists of integers: ------------ start C example ------------- #include<stdlib.h> struct list_el { int val; struct list_el * next; }; typedef

I was suprised to find that some bitcode I'm generating isn't getting optimized. Here, I'm doing the equivalent of "myarray[5]++" (on an "extern int *myarray"), repeated three times: @myarray = external global i32* define void @update_array() #0 { %1 = load i32** @myarray, align 8 %2 = getelementptr inbounds i32* %1, i64 5 %3 = load

On Jan 6, 2010, at 1:12 PM, fima rabin wrote: > I am trying to compile a little intrinsic function for my machine. Here is a dump from clang-cc with --emit-llvm option: > ===================== > > ; ModuleID = 'foo.c' > target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32" >

We are working on getting the documentation cleaned up to the point where it can be released. If you look at the test cases, you can infer what needs to be done. Basically since this is targeted for OpenCL, we annotate OpenCL kernels slightly different than normal functions and that is what causes the code to be generated. That being said, on my list of things to do is fix this so that any

So I was taking a look at Microsoft C++ ABI support while on vacation, and ran into a major issue. Given the following llvm-ir: $ clang++ -S -emit-llvm -O3 mangling.cpp -o - -Xclang -cxx-abi -Xclang microsoft ; ModuleID = 'mangling.cpp' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-f80:128:128-v64:64:64-

Hi there, I'm having trouble getting ExecutionEngine->runStaticConstructorsDestructors(module, true) to actually trigger static destructors in my code. The static constructors however do get called. I don't know if this is an LLVM or Clang issue, from looking at the IR (see below) it looks like the destructor is being tied to cxa_atexit, and I wonder if that is not called by