similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM native code and GDB -> Segmentation Fault

Hi Duncan, it is my program that dies. Moreover, if I run ./program.native, it works. You are missing something? 2011/11/22 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> > Hi Rafael, is it your program that dies with a segfault, or is it gdb that > dies? > > Ciao, Duncan. > > > I have a problem with the generation of native code. > > I'm wanting to run a native code

But the error is related to a conversion between llvm and gcc in "gcc-program.s -o program"? I need to use GDB to make an extraction of the information generated by GDB. For other programs, the process that wrote the first post worked perfectly, except for some. That this is the problem, for the compilation is the need to inform the -lm to link math libraries. It could be related to

Hi Rafael, is it your program that dies with a segfault, or is it gdb that dies? Ciao, Duncan. > I have a problem with the generation of native code. > I'm wanting to run a native code with GDB. > When I run the program with "/lli program.bc/ -> OK, > but if I do /"llc program.bc -o program.s/ " and then "/gcc -g program.s -o > program.native/"

Hi Rafael, > it is my program that dies. try running it under valgrind. Ciao, Duncan. > > Moreover, if I run ./program.native, it works. > > You are missing something? > > > 2011/11/22 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> > > Hi Rafael, is it your program that dies with a segfault, or is it gdb that dies? > >

Ok! I do understand. Thanks by help! 2011/9/5 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> > On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi < > parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes, that's how I'm doing now ... create a new block where the execution >> flow will continue after the shift, following the basics of basic blocks.

Hello, I created a new block for execution to continue, but I got the case in which a statement defined in a block is used in another, not dominate all uses. For example: entry: %n_addr = alloca i32, align 4 %retval = alloca i32 %"alloca point" = bitcast i32 0 to i32 store i32 %n, i32* %n_addr %0 = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* noalias getelementptr inbounds ([20 x i8]*

Yes, that's how I'm doing now ... create a new block where the execution flow will continue after the shift, following the basics of basic blocks. But, I want to find a way to reduce the number of block of my code. 2011/9/5 Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> > Rafael Baldiati Parizi wrote: > >> I have two values and I want see if them are equals. Then, I would a >>

I have two values and I want see if them are equals. Then, I would a instruction like if Value1 != Value2, error without create a new block, continuing the execution in the same block, forcing the LLI to execute this. 2011/9/5 Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> > On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi > <parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > >

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi < parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, that's how I'm doing now ... create a new block where the execution > flow will continue after the shift, following the basics of basic blocks. > But, I want to find a way to reduce the number of block of my code. Why do you want to reduce the number of LLVM IR blocks?

Rafael Baldiati Parizi wrote: > I have two values and I want see if them are equals. Then, I would a > instruction like > if Value1 != Value2, error > without create a new block, continuing the execution in the same block, > forcing the LLI to execute this. You can not. The definition of a "basic block" is a sequence of instructions with a single entry and a single exit.

Sorry, %3 instead of %4. 2011/9/14 Rafael Baldiati Parizi <parizi.computacao at gmail.com> > Hello, > I created a new block for execution to continue, but I got the case in > which a statement defined in a block is used in another, not dominate all > uses. > For example: > > entry: > %n_addr = alloca i32, align 4 > %retval = alloca i32 > %"alloca

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi <parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > I have two values and I want see if them are equals. Then, I would a > instruction like > if Value1 != Value2, error > without create a new block, continuing the execution in the same block, > forcing the LLI to execute this. You can't do that; a br instruction must be at the

Hello, I would know how can I make a branch in llvm ir without a label of destination? For example: br i1 %1, label %bb, *NO LABEL HERE* * * Thanks! -- *Rafael Parizi* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110905/5be7271c/attachment.html>

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi <parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > I would know how can I make a branch in llvm ir without a label of > destination? > For example: > br i1 %1, label %bb,  NO LABEL HERE What are you trying to do? -Eli

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi <parizi.computacao at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to know if is possible to create a new entry block and a branch to > old entry block? > How can i make this? Try BasicBlock::splitBasicBlock. -Eli

Hi, I'd like to know if is possible to create a new entry block and a branch to old entry block? How can i make this? Thanks -- *Rafael Parizi* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110930/a7c133f9/attachment.html>

I already did. What I need is to have this output in a txt file. On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Villmow, Micah <Micah.Villmow at amd.com>wrote: > Add an optimization level and you get information.**** > > D:\ >opt -stats temp.bc -o tmp.bc2**** > > ** ** > > D:\ >opt -stats temp.bc -o tmp.bc2 -O3**** > > >

You will need to install a cross compiler. I think you can find one somewhere in this link: https://sourcery.mentor.com/GNUToolchain/ Once you have a cross compiler, this should do what you want (if you want little-endian code): clang -target mipsel-unknown-linux -ccc-clang-archs mipsel -O3 hello.c -o hello.bc -emit-llvm llc -march=mipsel hello.bc -o hello.s mips-linux-gnu-gcc hello.s -o hello

Thanks Akira, it worked! On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: > You will need to install a cross compiler. > I think you can find one somewhere in this link: > https://sourcery.mentor.com/GNUToolchain/ > > Once you have a cross compiler, this should do what you want (if you > want little-endian code): > > clang -target

There is also: 1) an alternate clang driver at http://code.google.com/p/alternate-clang-driver/ . This makes it more or less gcc compatible. 2) there is a way to invoke it all directly with just a call to clang as is with x86/linux but it's not totally finished. i will try and post something about this. the direct form will work if you are on a mips linux machine but there are still some