similar to: [LLVMdev] Problem with IR code instruction

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Problem with IR code instruction"

2012 Jun 13
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-mc problem after a pass
Hi, I'm having some problem with llvm-mc on a program after applying a pass: ../../../build/Release+Asserts/bin/clang -emit-llvm -c -I./testprof/ -I./src/headers/ -I../libtommath-0.42.0/ -Wall -Wsign-compare -W -Wshadow -Wno-unused-parameter -DLTC_SOURCE -O0 -DLTC_NO_ASM -DUSE_LTM -DLTM_DESC -o src/pk/asn1/der/sequence/der_encode_sequence_ex.bc
2012 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-mc problem after a pass
Something is adding a bogus comment string. Specifically " # %case^M18 ", where "^M" is a single ctrl-M character. The ^M is seen by the asm parser as an end-of-line, so the '18' is a new token at the start of a line, not part of the comment. Is your pass perhaps using label names which might include literal "^M" characters? -Jim On Jun 13, 2012, at
2013 Feb 27
1
[LLVMdev] Compilation problem when addind a library
Hi ! Here is the situation. I created a pass in lib/Transforms/Obfuscation. I added a createFlattening() in IPO.h and in my code to be able to use it in PassManagerBuilder.cpp (lib/Transforms/IPO) in the method PopulateModulePassManager() so I can add my pass to standard passes. It all works if I add all my files in the lib/Transforms/IPO directory. But I want to keep them away in the
2012 Aug 20
3
[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"
Hi! I'm having some trouble with a pass I'm writing. I'm using DemotePHIToStack to remove all phi node in my code with this code (this is the first thing I do in my pass): // Erase phi node vector<PHINode*> phis; for (Function::iterator i=f->begin();i!=f->end();++i) { for(BasicBlock::iterator b=i->begin();b!=i->end();++b) {
2012 Aug 20
0
[LLVMdev] Problem with "Does not dominate all uses"
In your original file, %6 is defined in if.end11 and is used in cond.end. if.end11 branches to cond.true and cond.false, both of which branch unconditionally to cond.end. Therefore %6 dominates its use. In your second file %18 is defined in end.11 and used in cond.end. However, end.11 no longer dominates cond.end because you have rewritten all branches to go through the switch statement in