similar to: [LLVMdev] creating new Metadata

> Dear llvm-ers, > I am trying to attach a customized metadata to llvm instructions. > Let's say, I want to attach some number to each instruction. > I am trying to use > > void Instruction::setMetadata(unsigned KindID, MDNode* Node) > > but I am not sure how to create a brand new instance of an MDNode. > Do you have any code samples demonstrating how to do that?

Hello, Thank you very much for the pointers. I am are able to create new MDNodes, filled with some constants, and attach them to llvm instructions. However, the metadata map is not getting updated as expected. For example, instead of the expected new entry !n = metadata !{some values} we are getting !n = metadata !{null} Do you know what might be wrong? Do we need to enter the MDNodes into the

On 12/21/11 11:24 PM, Oksana Tkachuk wrote: > Hello, > Thank you very much for the pointers. > I am are able to create new MDNodes, filled with some constants, and > attach them > to llvm instructions. However, the metadata map is not getting updated > as expected. > For example, instead of the expected new entry If you look at PoolMDPass::runOnModule(), you'll see that

Dear all, I am looking to output assembly comments in my emitPrologue() function, just for my own readability. Searching for a way to do this found me this thread - http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-October/043722.html, which says that the best way to output comments from somewhere like emitPrologue() is to: 1. Create an MDString for the comment. 2. Attach it to an LLVM

Hello group, Per my posting on the Clang Newsgroup. I'm interested in doing some loop optimizations, towards this end I would like to add some custom Metadata to a Loop header. Loops in LLVM are represented using BasicBlocks, but unfortunately you can NOT add MetaData to a BasicBlock. Although you can add Metadata to an instruction. So I'm proposing to add the Metadata manipulation

I think the better solution should be: LLVMContext& C = is->getContext(); Value *values[] = { ConstantInt::getSigned(Type::getInt64Ty(C), *scsr*), MDString::get(C, *"path"*) }; lnstr.setMetadata(*"your_analysis_name"*, MDNode::get(C, values)); So that you can take advantage of the type system of LLVM bitcode, and don't have to cast the integers from/to strings

Hello everyone, I have an integer and I want to convert it to StringRef in order to set metadata. setMetadata->(StringRef, MDNode*); It is there a native LLVM way to do it? 1. In the llvm::APSInt Class is toString() method, which seems it is not for this purpose 2. itoa and string are not part of LLVM 3. stringstream is not part of LLVM 4. to_string is not part of LLVM 5. any casting method?

The problem is that I want to pass only srsr which is an int. "marked" was just an example :) Thanks you! On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Logan Chien <tzuhsiang.chien at gmail.com>wrote: > I'm not familiar with this, but maybe you can try: > > StringRef tst = ("marked" + Twine(srsr)).str(); > > It seems that you can't use integer as meta data

Yes, it sounds good. I can try tomorrow. Thank you for your advice ! On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Logan Chien <tzuhsiang.chien at gmail.com>wrote: > I think the better solution should be: > > > LLVMContext& C = is->getContext(); > Value *values[] = { > ConstantInt::getSigned(Type::getInt64Ty(C), *scsr*), > MDString::get(C, *"path"*) > };

Hi, I want to remove metadata from an instruction. Is there any way doing this in my pass? Regards, Kyriakos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130815/08200e23/attachment.html>

Hi, I think you may try to use llvm::Twine(int). For example, to convert 30 to string, you can use: Twine(30).str() To convert the string back to integer, you can try the StringRef::getAsInteger(unsigned, APInt &). For example: APInt i; str.getAsInteger(/*radix=*/ 10, /*output=*/ i); Sincerely, Logan On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu <

So, an update. I have managed to generate comments, although it does create a non-existent instruction. My method is as follows (and I would appreciate any comments on how to do it "better", although note that this won't make it into the final code :).) 1. I declared a "fake" instruction type to hold comments, ala: class FakeInst<dag outs, dag ins, string asmstr,

Hi, John Criswell-4 wrote: > > > You may want to use LLVM Metadata features. Search for MDNode in the > doxygen docs for some information on how to create metadata. > > I use metadata information in this way: unsigned mk = Context.getMDKindID(mdtype); Value *V = MDString::get(Context,StringRef(str)); MDNode* n = MDNode::get(Context, &V, 1);

> On 2015 Apr 14, at 21:46, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:33 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith > <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >> >> `Function` definitions should support `MDNode` attachments, with a >> similar syntax to instructions: >> >> define void @foo() nounwind !attach !0 { >>

On 10/25/10 4:13 AM, Xinfinity wrote: > Hello, > > Does there exist something like a "dummy" instruction that is not removed by > the optimizers, even if it seems to be dead code? > I want to use such instructions to carry metadata information, but they > should have a minimal impact on the code generation and optimization. I used > an add instruction: You may want

Here's a revised patch, plus patches showing how fpmath metadata could be turned on in clang and dragonegg (it seemed safest for the moment to condition on -ffast-math rather than on one of the flags implied by -ffast-math). Major changes: - The FPMathOperator class can no longer be used to change math settings, only to read them. Currently it can be queried for accuracy info. I split the

Hello, Does there exist something like a "dummy" instruction that is not removed by the optimizers, even if it seems to be dead code? I want to use such instructions to carry metadata information, but they should have a minimal impact on the code generation and optimization. I used an add instruction: %0 = add i8 1, 2, !pragma_instrument_mem_add !0 ; <i8> [#uses=0] which

> On 2015 Apr 15, at 10:06, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > On 2015 Apr 14, at 21:46, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:33 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith > > <dexonsmith at

Hello, I have an optimisation issue in an llvm IR pass - the issue being that unnecessary instructions are generated in the final assembly (with -O3). I want to create the following assembly snippet: mov dl,BYTE PTR [rsi+rdi*1] add dl,0x1 adc dl,0x0 mov BYTE PTR [rsi+rdi*1],dl however what is created is (variant #1): mov dl,BYTE PTR [rsi+rdx*1] add dl,0x1 cmp

Hi Craig, On 03.07.19 17:33, Craig Topper wrote: > Don't the CreateICmp calls return a Value* with an i1 type? But then > they are added to an i8 type? Not sure that works.  I had that initially: auto cf = IRB.CreateICmpULT(Incr, ConstantInt::get(Int8Ty, 1)); auto carry = IRB.CreateZExt(cf, Int8Ty); Incr = IRB.CreateAdd(Incr, carry); it makes no difference to the generated assembly