similar to: [LLVMdev] Segmentation fault while adding an addtional argument

Hi all, Sorry for the inconvenient about the previous post. The files were not attached. So I put them here again. I am a newbie in LLVM and I am trying to replace the function like: old function || new function ============================== ========= int haha(int a) { int haha(int a, char* ID) { ===> }

Hi all, I am a newbie in LLVM and I am trying to replace the function like: old function || new function ======================================= int haha(int a) { int haha(int a, char* ID) { ===> } } Of course in the newly replaced function "int haha(int,

I'm now writing a pass and I wanna ask a question about how to duplicate the function and add duplicated arguments in llvm, for example: func(int a, char *b) -> func(int a, char *b, int a1, char *b1) I'm now stuck at using "getOrInsertFunction" and how to handle "getArgumentList", please share your opinion, thanks a lot! James

2011/2/28 John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>: > On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In > particular, I want to > ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. > However > there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: >

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 5:10 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 2/28/11 10:04 AM, Frits van Bommel wrote: >> I don't think a full clone is necessary, since he wants to replace the >> function. He only needs to create the new function and splice in the >> body of the old one. > > That is exactly what MakeFunctionClone() does.  It creates a

On 2/28/11 10:04 AM, Frits van Bommel wrote: > 2011/2/28 John Criswell<criswell at illinois.edu>: >> On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In >> particular, I want to >> ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. >>

Valery, That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Reid. Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 >

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs > repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Here's an idea: how about we take the ModuleMaker, Valery's previous example, and this one and put them all in one "small examples" project? -Chris > Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > >

On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? Reid. Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > >>That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can > only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to > move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? You're right. The simples way to do this would be to have: projects/ SmallExamples/

Hello, I am a newbie to LLVM and right now I am on the hook to parse some IR code and do some instrumentations. However, my problem is that no matter how I tweak my parsing code, it simply cannot print out anything. So here is my C code: int your_fun(int arg2) { int x = arg2; return x+2; } And here is my parsing code: #include <llvm/IR/Module.h> #include

Hi, Can anyone tell me if there's a straighforward way to create a new BasicBlock without inserting it into a function's basic block list? I want to do this so I can create a forward reference to a block that's position in the function is not yet known. I've tried: Function function Builder builder; bb = BasicBlock::Create(function,...) bb.eraseFromParent() ... add other

Added logs and screenshots with screen that appears during before a reboot and errors are reported to AMM in bladecenter -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: xen errors.zip Type: application/zip Size: 194637 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/attachments/20140905/63a7d8df/attachment-0001.zip>

On 2/28/11 6:31 AM, Gabriel Rodríguez wrote: > Hi all, > > I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In > particular, I want to > ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and > argsv. However > there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: > llvm::Function::getFunctionType() returns a > a reference to a const object,

On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 01:22:22PM -0600, Chris Lattner wrote: > // Approach number 2, the more explicit way: > BB->getParent()->getInstList().erase(BB); // Remove from list & delete > > // Approach number 3, remove from the list, then delete it explicitly: > BB->getParent()->getInstList().remove(BB); // Just remove from list > delete BB;

On Jun 13, 2010, at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Letz wrote: > Hi, > > In my code generator, I need to prepare a block and add instructions to it, then insert this block in a function defined later (that is I cannot create the function at the beginning stage become some info are not available yet). I tried to create a block without any "parent" (BasicBlock::Create(getGlobalContext(),

Hi Chris, >> In my code generator, I need to prepare a block and add instructions to it, then insert this block in a function defined later (that is I cannot create the function at the beginning stage become some info are not available yet). I tried to create a block without any "parent" (BasicBlock::Create(getGlobalContext(), "init"), fill it, but how to link it with

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:27 PM, James Williams <junk at giantblob.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me if there's a straighforward way to create a new > BasicBlock without inserting it into a function's basic block list? I want > to do this so I can create a forward reference to a block that's position in > the function is not yet known. > > I've

Hi all, I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In particular, I want to ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. However there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: llvm::Function::getFunctionType() returns a a reference to a const object, while modifying only the argument list yields an error during verification since the

All, I'm seeing duplication of DICompileUnits in a pass that worked in 3.8. I assume I'm doing something wrong. Would someone be willing to point me in the right direction? The below minimized pass reproduces my issue in 4.0 with the following error: DICompileUnit not listed in llvm.dbg.cu !1707 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C_plus_plus, file: !1, producer: "clang