similar to: [LLVMdev] StructTypes in module

Nella citazione mercoledì 31 agosto 2011 20:35:46, Chris Lattner ha scritto: > On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: >> Quick question: how do I get a list of StructType* defined/used in a Module? I can't seem to find an appropriate iterator in the Module class... > Module::findUsedStructTypes. Note that this requires scanning the entire module, it is not an

On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > Quick question: how do I get a list of StructType* defined/used in a Module? I can't seem to find an appropriate iterator in the Module class... Module::findUsedStructTypes. Note that this requires scanning the entire module, it is not an efficient operation. -Chris

Nella citazione martedì 2 agosto 2011 20:02:08, Michael Ilseman ha scritto: > I'm assuming that you're talking about a situation where this can't be > determined statically in the existing LLVM IR, but you know it's true > and want to put it in (e.g. you're the one generating LLVM IR). Correct. Or, more precisely, I'd like to investigate macro compression, i.e.

I'm trying to figure out how to feed a blockaddress to a switch condition AND destination (basically emulating an indirectbr via a switch; I know it's not a good approach, I'm just experimenting). Suppose I have the following: SwitchInst *s = SwitchInst::Create(...); BasicBlock *bb = ...; PtrToIntInst k = new PtrToIntInst(BlockAddress::get(bb), <TYPE>, "", s);

Nella citazione martedì 2 agosto 2011 22:01:13, Carlo Alberto Ferraris ha scritto: > My question is: > what is the best way to > express such relationships in LLVM IR ("best" in the sense of allowing > other optimizations to run effectively)? Bear in mind that in this > example N=2, but it may be way bigger than that. Just to clarify: I already figured out two ways to

I need some advice on "forwarding" arguments to a callee. Suppose I have a function F that is called at the beginning of all other functions in the module. From F I need to access (read) the arguments passed to its immediate caller. Right now I do something like boxing all arguments in the caller inside a struct and passing a pointer to the struct to F, alongside an identifier

Suppose I have a bb with N predecessors and N successors. What is, in your opinion, the best way to express that the bb has (dynamically) only one successor (i.e. if coming from the i-th predecessor we will always jump to the i-th successor)? b.r., -- Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com <mailto:cafxx at strayorange.com>> website/blog

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com> wrote: > I'm trying to figure out how to feed a blockaddress to a switch condition > AND destination (basically emulating an indirectbr via a switch; I know it's > not a good approach, I'm just experimenting). > Suppose I have the following: > > SwitchInst *s =

Nella citazione giovedì 7 luglio 2011 19:41:16, John McCall ha scritto: > On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:33 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: >> Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: >>> I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at >>> least attempts to thread across indirect branches. You can either try >>> to fix it or file a

Nella citazione giovedì 18 agosto 2011 09:11:36, Carlo Alberto Ferraris ha scritto: > I need some advice on "forwarding" arguments to a callee. Suppose I have > a function F that is called at the beginning of all other functions in > the module. From F I need to access (read) the arguments passed to its > immediate caller. Right now I do something like boxing all

Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: > I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at > least attempts to thread across indirect branches. You can either try > to fix it or file a bug with your test case. In the source it says "If the predecessor is an indirect goto, we can't split the edge.

On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:33 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: >> >> I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at least attempts to thread across indirect branches. You can either try to fix it or file a bug with your test case. > In the source it says "If the predecessor is an indirect goto, we

I'm assuming that you're talking about a situation where this can't be determined statically in the existing LLVM IR, but you know it's true and want to put it in (e.g. you're the one generating LLVM IR). If that's not the case, then see if JumpThreading will do it for you. I'm not familiar with a way to express exactly what you want to say, but are you opposed to just

Hi Erkki, > I want to experiment with avoiding mutable state as far as I can. At the moment > there are no mutable variables -- only immutable value types (numerics, bool, > vectors, tuples) and I've been doing everything in LLVM registers. The compiler > doesn't generate a single alloca, load or store at the moment. > > I wonder if it was maybe a bad idea to do it this

Hi all, I want to run a legacy function-level pass on only parts of the functions of a module (for example, only those functions named with "_built_in_" prefix). How can i do it? I don't want to rewrite the pass itself. best regards, Yabin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Nella citazione venerdì 29 luglio 2011 11:24:47, Duncan Sands ha scritto: > In-register structs and arrays are not intended to be used for large structs and > arrays. Out of curiosity, why would that be the case? -- Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com <mailto:cafxx at strayorange.com>> website/blog <http://cafxx.strayorange.com> - +39 333 7643 235

I've read that LiveValues has been removed from trunk. Did it bitrot or was simply removed because a replacement is available? If it's the former, what caused the bitrotting? If it's the latter, what's the replacement? (I've found LiveVariables but I'm not sure it can be used in a ModulePass). b.r. -- Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com <mailto:cafxx

Hello, I'm updating a legacy code using LLVM 2.5 where it has an iteration through a Module's TypeSymbolTable to process each StructType. In LLVM 3.4, TypeSymbolTable has been removed. I can only find the LLVMContextImpl instance of a Module's LLVMContext which has AnonStructTypes and NamedStructTypes two maps. However, LLVMContextImpl is an opaque class which cannot be directly

> That's a weird one. Does addr2line work? > $ addr2line -e CGF.so <address> cafxx at ubuntu:~/Projects/llvm2/Debug+Asserts/bin$ objdump -t ../lib/CGF.so | grep flatten 0000000000005622 l F .text 0000000000000aa6 _ZN12_GLOBAL__N_111CGFFunction7flattenEv 00000000000041d6 l F .text 000000000000049c _ZN12_GLOBAL__N_111CGFCallSite7flattenEv

LiveVariables is the optimized and tested way to get variable liveness information (it's used by register allocation). Unfortunately it requires a MachineFunction to work - so you'll either need to lower to one of the built-in targets or add your own target to acquire access to this pass. Andrew On 03/31/2011 12:28 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > I've read that LiveValues