similar to: [LLVMdev] Finding the value of variables

According to comment in tree-nested.c, these frames should be only introduced in case of debug or OpenMP lowering: /* A subroutine of convert_nonlocal_reference_op. Create a local variable in the nested function with DECL_VALUE_EXPR set to reference the true variable in the parent function. This is used both for debug info and in OpenMP lowering. */ However, in this code example we

Hi Duncan, A DragonEgg/GCC-related question: do you know where these strange FRAME tokens originate from (e.g. %struct.FRAME.matmul)? Compiling simple Fortran code with DragonEgg: > cat matmul.f90 subroutine matmul(nx, ny, nz) implicit none integer :: nx, ny, nz real, dimension(nx, ny) :: A real, dimension(ny, nz) :: B real, dimension(nx, nz) :: C integer :: i, j, k real,

Frank, It looks like the loop vectorizer is unable to tell that the two stores in your code never overlap. This is probably because of the sign-extend in your code. Can you extend the indices to 64bit ? Thanks, Nadav On Oct 28, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Frank Winter <fwinter at jlab.org> wrote: > Verifying function > running passes ... > LV: Checking a loop in "bar" > LV:

Hi, Your problem is that the function arguments, which are makes as noalias, are not being directly used as the base objects of the array accesses: > %v0.addr = alloca float*, align 8 > %v1.addr = alloca float*, align 8 > %v2.addr = alloca float*, align 8 > %t.addr = alloca float*, align 8 ... > store float* %v0, float** %v0.addr, align 8 > store float* %v1, float** %v1.addr,

Verifying function running passes ... LV: Checking a loop in "bar" LV: Found a loop: L0 LV: Found an induction variable. LV: We need to do 0 pointer comparisons. LV: Checking memory dependencies LV: Bad stride - Not an AddRecExpr pointer %13 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 %1 SCEV: ((4 * (sext i32 {(256 + %arg0),+,1}<nw><%L0> to i64)) + %arg2) LV: Src Scev: {((4 * (sext

Thanks,Cheers! I found the problem is that the "Function *call_print" using the same name as the “class call_print”, which made the compiler wrongly resolved the call_print type! But I got another problems. I successfully compile the pass and I can insert the call printf (C Lib function) instructions in the LLVM IR(eg: call.bc). If the call.bc didn't contain call printf

Hi, Comments inline. Ben On 18/07/2008 16:30, "Eli Friedman" <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Benedict Gaster > <benedict.gaster at amd.com> wrote: >> Consider the following C code: >> >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) ))

Hi, I made a simple test about aggregates in llvm IR. My simple LLVM code is running as expected under linux 32/64, but not under windows 32. After searched on the web on multiple return values, I'm still not sure if this test case can be flagged as the ABI issue. Or this would be a llvm code generator bug on window 32. The complete IR is attached as a text file and I checked the test with

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Benedict Gaster <benedict.gaster at amd.com> wrote: > Consider the following C code: > > typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; > typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) __attribute__(( aligned(4) )) AFAIK, the aligned attribute doesn't do anything on a typedef of anything other than a struct/union type in either

using `opt --print-after-all -O3` I see that EarlyCSE is interpreting the call to `ceil` and constant fold: *** IR Dump After Early CSE *** ; Function Attrs: nobuiltin nounwind define i1 @do_test() #2 { Entry: %0 = call fastcc float @ceil(float 0.000000e+00) #6 %1 = call fastcc float @ceil32(float 0.000000e+00) #6 %2 = fcmp fast oeq float 0.000000e+00, %1 ret i1 %2 } So just running `opt

Hi, LLVM community: I found basicaa seems not to tell must-not-alias for __restrict__ arguments in c/c++. It only compares two pointers and the underlying objects they point to. I wonder how clang does alias analysis for c/c++ keyword restrict. let assume we compile the following code: $cat myalias.cc float foo(float * __restrict__ v0, float * __restrict__ v1, float * __restrict__ v2, float *

Consider the following C code: typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) __attribute__(( aligned(4) )) float float2_align2; void foo(void) { const float * p; size_t offset; float2 tmp = *((float2_align2 *)(p+offset)); } When compiled with clang ‹emit-llvm I get: define void @foo() { entry: %p = alloca float*, align 4

+Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> who might have some ideas about the representation choices/current/future behavior here On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:27 PM Keith Walker via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I have been investigating missing variables / incorrect variable values > when debugging code compiled at –O1 (and above) and believe that I have >

I assumed that C floats are 32 bits and doubles 64 bits ... but This code int main(){ float f; double f1; f = 3.145; f1 = 3.145; return(0); } Compiles (via clang) to: ; ModuleID = 'test101.c' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32" target triple =

Dear LLVM developers, Our team has developed an LLVM-based protection mechanism that (i) prevents control-flow hijack attacks enabled by memory corruption errors and (ii) has very low performance overhead. We would like to contribute the implementation to LLVM. We presented this work at the OSDI 2014 conference, at several software companies, and several US universities. We received positive

I changed the input C to using a 64 bit type for the loop index (this eliminates 'sext' instructions in the IR) Here the IR produced with clang -O0 define float @foo(i64 %start, i64 %end, float* %A) #0 { entry: %start.addr = alloca i64, align 8 %end.addr = alloca i64, align 8 %A.addr = alloca float*, align 8 %sum = alloca [4 x float], align 16 %i = alloca i64, align 8

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:

Hi Wei, this is a FAQ. The LLVM code generators do *not* try to produce ABI conformant code. Instead, your front-end must produce LLVM IR which is already ABI conformant. For example, on a platform where a function returning a struct should return it via a hidden pointer, the IR function should be declared with an explicit pointer argument for returning it; while on platforms for which it

Thanks for reply! This is indeed annoying. I suspect that passing an pointer to the struct and using GEP instructions to access and modify the struct would work on all platforms. Is this true? Thanks, Wei On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Wei, this is a FAQ. The LLVM code generators do *not* try to produce > ABI > conformant code.

Hi. I found that, in all the LLVM IR I get from the source C file. the unnamed values all created by the "load" instruction. eg: ; Function Attrs: nounwind uwtable define i32 @add(i32 %x, i32 %y) #0 { entry: %x.addr = alloca i32, align 4 %y.addr = alloca i32, align 4 %c = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 %x, i32* %x.addr, align 4 store i32 %y, i32* %y.addr, align 4 * %0 =