similar to: [LLVMdev] Follow-up questions after successful upgrade to LLVM 3.0rc4

In response to: > Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:21:34 +0100 > From: Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr<mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Follow-up questions after successful upgrade to > LLVM 3.0rc4 > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Message-ID: <4ECC044E.3020202 at free.fr<mailto:4ECC044E.3020202 at

In response to: > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:24:16 +0100 > From: Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr<mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Follow-up questions after successful upgrade to > LLVM 3.0rc4 > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Hi Kevin, >> Since I don't have llvm-gcc installed, I tried to do the

> 2) I had no problem running the V3.0 regression tests according to the instructions. However, the instructions in the Testing Infrastructure Guide for running the Test Suite presume the existence and use of llvm-gcc, http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html, both on-line and in the rc4 kits. Now that llvm-gcc is gone for V3.0, it isn't completely obvious how to run the test-suite

陳韋任 <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> writes: >> 2) I had no problem running the V3.0 regression tests according to the instructions. However, the instructions in the Testing Infrastructure Guide for running the Test Suite presume the existence and use of llvm-gcc, http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html, both on-line and in the rc4 kits. Now that llvm-gcc is gone for V3.0, it

On Nov 28, 2011, at 3:44 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > 陳韋任 <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> writes: > >>> 2) I had no problem running the V3.0 regression tests according to the instructions. However, the instructions in the Testing Infrastructure Guide for running the Test Suite presume the existence and use of llvm-gcc, http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html, both on-line

I fixed all the other build errors. This is the only one pending. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:33 PM, AbhishekR <abhishekr1982 at gmail.com> wrote: > I fixed most of the errors. > > There is a weird error I am seeing and seems to be some incompatibility in > expanding macros between FileSystem.h in LLVM and intl.h in wxWidgets. Any > idea how to fix this? > > In file

I fixed most of the errors. There is a weird error I am seeing and seems to be some incompatibility in expanding macros between FileSystem.h in LLVM and intl.h in wxWidgets. Any idea how to fix this? In file included from /home/arhishee/work/llvm-tv/llvm-tv/tools/llvm-tv/GraphDrawer.cpp:4: In file included from /home/arhishee/work/llvm-tv/llvm30/include/llvm/Support/FileUtilities.h:18: In file

Hello, I am trying to modify my LLVM-based compiler to perform an initial, no-optimization compilation synchronously on startup and then perform an asynchronous, optimized recompilation in the background, and I am getting in one of the optimization passes. - I am using the official release of LLVM 2.8 - I have compiled LLVM with threading enabled; I am running llvm::llvm_start_multithreaded() on

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:07 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com <mailto:chandlerc at gmail.com>> wrote: > This thread kinda died. I'd like to revive it. > > The new PM stuff is making excellent progress, and this is actually one of the last things to

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > Hi Sean, > > Sean Silva wrote: > > While building test-suite with the new PM, I ran into problems with > > AssertingVH being triggered which is obvious in retrospect: > > https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28400 > > > > Both cases I ran into revolve around LVI

While building test-suite with the new PM, I ran into problems with AssertingVH being triggered which is obvious in retrospect: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28400 Both cases I ran into revolve around LVI which holds AssertingVH. Essentially, what happens is this: 1. LVI holds an AssertingVH pointing at a BasicBlock 2. Some other pass ends up deleting that BB (e.g. SimplifyCFG) 3. BOOM

Михаил wrote: > Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in > eraseFromParent(): > > While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi > An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! > UNREACHABLE executed at /Users/neonomaly/LLVM/LLVM/lib/VMCore/Value.cpp:561! The replaceAllUsesWith + eraseFromParent pattern remains correct, but there's

Hi! In some cases the use of blockaddress() crashes llc. I've attached two test-cases, one that crashes and for reference a slightly modified one (just 2 lines are commented) that works. I compile the files with # llvm-as test_crash.ll -o - | llc -f -o temp.s - and get 0 llc 0x0000000000c6ab6f 1 llc 0x0000000000c6b38d 2 libpthread.so.0 0x00007feccd2270f0 3

Current llvm svn at r136461 is failing to bootstrap under darwin11 with... cd /sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0/llvm-3.0/build/tools/edis && /sw/bin/cmake -E cmake_link_script CMakeFiles/EnhancedDisassembly.dir/link.txt --verbose=1 /sw/var/lib/fink/path-prefix-clang/c++ -fPIC -fno-rtti -O3 -DNDEBUG -shared -L/sw/lib -o ../../lib/libEnhancedDisassembly.dylib -install_name

It is ModulePass with AnalysisUsage of CallGraph Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail 22.04.2012, в 5:20, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > Михаил wrote: >> Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still get bug in >> eraseFromParent(): >> >> While deleting: i32 (%class.B*, i32)* %_ZN1B1xEi >> An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! >>

Михаил wrote: > It is ModulePass with AnalysisUsage of CallGraph Ah, then you'll need to update the CallGraph first. Use "CG.removeFunctionFromModule(F);" before deleting it. Nick > Yours sincerely, > Kadysev Mikhail > > 22.04.2012, в 5:20, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > >> Михаил wrote: >>> Thanks, but I replaceAllUsesWith() - works well, but I still

On 09/02/2011 05:58 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Yiannis, > >> I have been using llvm 2.8 (i know ancient history!) for a backend that i was >> implementing. I have been trying to port my patches to latest llvm (svn build) >> lately but i have one problem as far as the Exception Handling mechanism is >> concerned. It seems that there are no Exception Tables generated

Hello... Currently in the process of upgrading Samba v2.0.10 to Samba v3.0.x, while conducting some minimal testing, it turns-out that Samba v3.0.x is performing slower than Samba v2.0.10. Set-ups: A. Samba v3.0.x --> Same PC client is accessing the samba share running on Red Hat 4.5 (64bit, HP DL380) which in turn has an NFS mount coming from another SAN attached Red Hat 4.5 (64bit, HP

On 03/01/2014 21:55, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com > <mailto:clattner at apple.com>> wrote: > > n Nov 11, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com > <mailto:alp at nuanti.com>> wrote: > > >> Even when you have a !NDEBUG build, the platform assert() is pretty

Hi everyone, we have several header files in which the NDEBUG macro is being used. In some of these, the NDEBUG macro changes the size, the interface, or the layout of a type. One example is AssertingVH, which turns into a flat, transparent Value* wrapper in Release build. Now everywhere you use these headers, the state of the NDEBUG flag must be the same, or else bad things could happen. This