similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM ERROR: Cannot select: intrinsic %llvm.annotation

Hello all, According to *clang/lib/CodeGen/CodeGenFunction.cpp*, a LLVM annotation intrinsic call has 4 arguments: - llvm::Value *AnnotatedVal, - Builder.CreateBitCast(CGM.EmitAnnotationString(AnnotationStr), Int8PtrTy), - Builder.CreateBitCast(CGM.EmitAnnotationUnit(Location), Int8PtrTy), - CGM.EmitAnnotationLineNo(Location) However, this is what an annotation intrinsic *char

Hi Pablo, in fact this is coming from the "ssp" attribute on main, which turns on LLVM's stack protection logic. I have no idea what that does exactly, but it seems to be causing the problem. On ubuntu systems it is enabled by default. You can turn it off by passing -fno-stack-protector to dragonegg. However please still open a bugreport since stack protection is supposed to work.

On 23 October 2013 22:41, Vassil Vassilev <vvasilev at cern.ch> wrote: > Hi, > I have: > ... > @.str1 = private unnamed_addr constant [21 x i8] c"Now f is a > function\0A\00", align 1 > ; Function Attrs: ssp uwtable > define i32 @_Z1fv() #2 { > entry: > %call = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([21 x > i8]* @.str1, i32 0,

Hi, I have: ... @.str1 = private unnamed_addr constant [21 x i8] c"Now f is a function\0A\00", align 1 ; Function Attrs: ssp uwtable define i32 @_Z1fv() #2 { entry: %call = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([21 x i8]* @.str1, i32 0, i32 0)) ret i32 0 } Then I get after trying to erase the function from the module: 511

> I created a plugin to add simple Annotations to VarDecls and > FieldDecls, and write this modified AST out to a file. I notice that > when I use clang to compile this file I get different code then when I > use the source directly. In both cases I'm compiling with -O4. Can > anyone explain this? This is how clang implements annotations on local variables, that's all.

Hi Bill, Thanks for working on this. Is there a reference for the function attribute uwtable, or is it to be defined as part of this effort? Thanks in advance Garrison On Jul 23, 2011, at 1:29, Bill Wendling wrote: > What? Yet another EH proposal?! This one is different from the others in that > I'm planning to start implementing this shortly. But I want your feedback! I've

I created a plugin to add simple Annotations to VarDecls and FieldDecls, and write this modified AST out to a file. I notice that when I use clang to compile this file I get different code then when I use the source directly. In both cases I'm compiling with -O4. Can anyone explain this? Thanks define i32 @somefunc(i32 (i32)* %ptr) nounwind uwtable { entry: %ptr.addr = alloca i32 (i32)*,

Hi Pablo, I can reproduce this with the supplied IR. It is related to the use of __memcpy_chk. As far as I can see it is a bug in lli or the LLVM code generators. Can you please open a bugreport, attaching the LLVM IR. Ciao, Duncan. On 23/01/12 17:00, Pablo Barrio wrote: > Hi Duncan, >>> #include<stdio.h> >>> #include<string.h> >>> >>> int

Hello Has there been any progress on this topic ? The 3.9 optimizer output is still the same as I just looked. https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24448 Ciao Nat! Sanjay Patel schrieb: > [cc'ing Zia] > > We have this transform with -Os for some cases after: > http://reviews.llvm.org/rL244601 > http://reviews.llvm.org/D11363 > > but something in this example is

On 10/24/13 2:13 AM, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > On 23 October 2013 22:41, Vassil Vassilev <vvasilev at cern.ch> wrote: >> Hi, >> I have: >> ... >> @.str1 = private unnamed_addr constant [21 x i8] c"Now f is a >> function\0A\00", align 1 >> ; Function Attrs: ssp uwtable >> define i32 @_Z1fv() #2 { >> entry: >> %call =

Hi Duncan, >> #include<stdio.h> >> #include<string.h> >> >> int main(int argc, char** argv){ >> >> char a[8] = "aaaaaaa"; >> char b[8] = "bbbbbbb"; >> >> char *c = (char*) malloc(sizeof(char)*(strlen(a)+strlen(b)+1)); >> memcpy(c, a, strlen(a)); >> memcpy(c + strlen(a), b, strlen(b) + 1); >>

Hi I am upgrading my clang fork from 5.0 to 6.0 and I am hit by this error: Access type node must be a valid scalar type %4 = load %"struct.Foo::p.test1::"*, %"struct.Foo::p.test1::"** %_param.addr, align 8, !tbaa !16 !16 = !{!15, !15, i64 0} !15 = !{!"p.test1::", !13, i64 0, !13, i64 8} It looks like !16 is referencing !15, which is a struct. !13 is !13 =

Hi the appended IR code does not optimize to my liking :) this is the interesting part in x86_64, that got produced via clang -Os: --- movq -16(%r12), %rax movl -4(%rax), %ecx andl $2298949, %ecx ## imm = 0x231445 cmpq $2298949, (%rax,%rcx) ## imm = 0x231445 leaq 8(%rax,%rcx), %rax cmovneq %r15, %rax movl $2298949, %esi ## imm = 0x231445 movq %r12, %rdi movq %r14,

Hi Micah, all, On Dec 13, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: 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 function will be generated

Hello everyone ! I followed http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4976298/modern-equivalent-of-llvm-annotationmanagerin order to get annotations from my target bytecode. All the examples that I give in the following is related to the code from that link. I have `__attribute__((annotate("DS"))) int f=0;` into the target C++ program and the related IR code: @.str = private unnamed_addr

Hello everyone, I have the following LLVM IR : @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [3 x i8] c"DS\00", section "llvm.metadata" @llvm.global.annotations = appending global [1 x { i8*, i8*, i8*, i32 }] [{ i8*, i8*, i8*, i32 } { i8* bitcast (i32* @f to i8*), i8* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i8]* @.str, i32 0, i32 0), i8* getelementptr inbounds ([9 x i8]* @.str1, i32 0, i32 0),

What? Yet another EH proposal?! This one is different from the others in that I'm planning to start implementing this shortly. But I want your feedback! I've all ready gotten a lot of feedback from Chris, John, Jim, Eric, and many others. Now is your turn! Please read this proposal and send me your comments, suggestions, and concerns. -bw

Dear all, First of all, Merry Christmas! :) While testing a File I/O sample program, I've encountered a link failure due to missing implementation of "\01__isoc99_fscanf" function. I think this function should be named "__isoc99_fscanf" instead. Please see the program code and LLVM IR generated by DragonEgg and clang below. It shows that clang generates

Hi Asit, thanks for the reply. But I guess I was not clear in my question. Actually, i dont want to use __ATTRIBUTE__((ANNOTATE("MOVIATTR"))), since in documentation it is stated that "This intrinsic allows annotation of local variables with arbitrary strings. This can be useful for special purpose optimizations that want to look for these annotations. These have no other

Hi John, I have looked into the EmitAutoVarAlloca() in CGDecl.cpp. However, I could not figure out how to employ my custom attribute for code generation. For example, my custom attribute is visible in CGDecl.cpp but how can I generate based on my custom attribute if (D.hasAttr<myCustomAttri>()) { //What to do here? } What I wan in IR is something like below. Without Custom Attribute: