similar to: [LLVMdev] How to break/iterate over nested instructions.

Hi Manish, > I wish to iterate over all instructions (where opCode == desired_opCode). I > could iterate over all the instruction expect the nested instructions like: > > %add.ptr229 = getelementptr inbounds i8* getelementptr inbounds ([4096 x i8]* > @_Func1, i32 0, i32 0), i64 %idx.ext228 this is not a nested instruction. The inner getelementptr is a ConstantExpr (a constant)

Hi Duncan, Why to break? I wish to analyse all the operands of getelemetptr instructions. For which I iterate over the code and get the instruction of interest by getopcode == getelementptr. But the getelementptrs in this form as in my last mail are getting away from my pass. So i wish to break it. I have a work around if breaking is not possible, but I think it may be a common requirement by

Dear Manish, First, in answer to your original question: yes, there is a pass that will convert constant expression GEPs used within LLVM instructions into GEP instructions. SAFECode has a pass called BreakConstantGEPs in safecode/trunk/lib/ArrayBoundChecks/BreakConstantGEPs.cpp (http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/safecode/trunk/lib/ArrayBoundChecks/BreakConstantGEPs.cpp?view=log). It

Hello All, I am developing a JRuby on Rails 3 application. Standard stuff. I am facing problems getting autotest to run. Here''s the trace: % autotest loading autotest/rails_rspec2 bundle exec /Users/manish/Foo/Foo-Server/jruby-1.5.2/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.0.0.beta.22/bin/rspec

Hi, You might want to try running -loops -loop-simplify before loop unroll. >From loop simplify.cpp This pass performs several transformations to transform natural loops into a00011 // simpler form, which makes subsequent analyses and transformations simpler and00012 // more effective. Arushi On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> wrote: > You

Even after all the sequence of commands below bit-code is not showing any effect of loop-unrolling *manish at manish:~/Test2$ llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loops Hello.bc -o Hello1.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loopsimplify Hello1.bc -o Hello2.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -indvars Hello2.bc -o Hello3.bc* *manish at

1. You should run the passes in the same opt command, for passes like loops which is an analysis pass provides results to the following passes. 2. You can pass a -debug flag to opt to see the some debugging info. 3. I tried this opt -mem2reg -loops -loopsimplify -loop-unroll -unroll-count=3 -debug loop.o -o tt.bc and got this message. Loop Size = 14 Can't unroll; loop not terminated by

Thanks Everyone for the info. I am planning to work with DSA on llvm-2.9. Hope it is working as John mentioned. Manish On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:06 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 9/19/11 9:12 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > > Dear All, > > I am curious to know the reason for removal of andersen pointer analysis. > Is it because of some issues? We

Manish Jain wrote: > > On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and installed the version you indicated, but >>>> I >>>> get nothing at all: >>>> >>>> /home/bourne # teamviewer

On 12/19/2017 02:57 PM, Manish Jain wrote: > > > On 12/20/17 01:45, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Manish Jain wrote: >>> >>> On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and

Hi, Transform/LoopStrengthReduction/post-inc-icmpzero.ll was failing for clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 build-bot configuration. The reason for the failure was the test was using hardcoded names. The attached patch fixes this failure by replacing the hard-coded variables names with pattern-matched variable names. I have checked that the test pass after applying the patch. Could somebody please

Hi Renato, Thanks! I will make sure the patches are posted to the correct mailing list. Manish On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Renato Golin Linaro < renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Manish, > > Thanks for the patch, I'll check and commit. > > cheers, > --renato > > PS: Patches are normally sent to llvm-commit list, unless they require a > lot of

On 12/19/17 19:55, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 12/19/2017 07:16 AM, Manish Jain wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am writing a book about Unix (Linux / FreeBSD) and my book needs >> documentation for TeamViewer13 running under Centos 7 (64-bit). >> >> Unfortunately, running TeamViewer does not get me a GUI -- the install >> went smoothly and teamviewerd daemon is

What member function to use if I wish to operate on results of an instruction. eg. Instruction %1 = getelementptr inbounds [10 x i32]* %a, i32 0, i32 %0 I->getOperand will give me the operands. How should I get hold of %1? Thanks, Manish -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 8/4/11 1:53 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > It would be great help if someone can point me to similar code in > Analysis or Transform, i.e. tracing value dependencies chains. If I understand correctly, given an instruction I, you want to find its operands o1 through oN, and then find the instructions (or LLVM values) that generate the values o1 through oN, and then find the instructions

On 12/19/2017 03:57 PM, Manish Jain wrote: > > > On 12/20/17 01:45, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Manish Jain wrote: >>> >>> On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and

Dear All, I am curious to know the reason for removal of andersen pointer analysis. Is it because of some issues? We need it on llvm-2.9, if possible. Do we have some better version of pointer analysis on llvm-2.9? Thanks, Manish -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

The README at the location shared by John says "DSA is undergoing significant changes and may not be entirely stable or correct. See lib/DSA/README" So, I was wondering from where should one pick the code. Although I will start my analysis and see how results turn out to be. But any comments on this line will be helpful. Thanks Manish On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Manish Gupta

On 8/4/11 2:45 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > Hey John, > > Yes this is what I am looking for. I wrote a code as I described in my > first mail and I am getting desired result except when the chain > encounters load instruction (you have also mentioned the that u skip > loads). Okay. Just out of curiosity, is your static slice local (stopping at function arguments) or

Hello R community members, I'm trying to install the 'rqpd' package which is developed by Roger Koenker and Stefan Bache. When I try to install the package using the command 'install.packages("rqpd",repos="http://R-Forge.R-project.org")' I'm getting the following two messages: i) package ?rqpd? is available as a source package but not as a binary