similar to: [LLVMdev] Create Instruction

I've recently been looking at how to implement in LLVM IR the rounding of floating point values when casting using different rounding modes and I've hit some problems. It seems that when casting down floats to less precise types the ``fptrunc`` LLVM IR instruction is used. The LLVM language reference suggests that it just truncates the value (which would be equivalent to rounding towards

Hello all, I just noticed that LLVM has trouble recognizing nested simple select operations. My testcase is as follows: -------------------------- snip ------------------------------ #include <stdio.h> int main(int argc, char **argv) { int a; scanf("%d", &a); a = a > 255 ? 255 : a < 0 ? 0 : a; printf("A: %d\n", a); return 0; }

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 =

After I spend some time working with the function attribute* deduction pass** [1,3], I would like to propose a "proper" organization***. Why? Because we do not derive nearly as many attributes as we could****, while we do maintain various (separate and diffently organized) "data-flow-like analyses" to do so. What else? I propose a single optimistic data-flow

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! Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail 21.04.2012, в 23:45, Nick Lewycky написал(а): > Михаил wrote: >> How correctly

Thank you all for your reply. if(a>10) b=10; else if (a<10) b = 5; Here is the IR of the if-elseif: 56 %0 = load i32, i32* %a, align 4 57 %cmp = icmp sgt i32 %0, 10 58 br i1 %cmp, label %if.then, label %if.else 60 if.then: ; preds = %entry 61 store i32 10, i32* %b, align 4 62 br label %if.end.4 63 64 if.else:

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! >>

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:21:19PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written > eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving > as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a > quickly-written sh or eval plugin, we should not be so insistent as > treating an EPIPE failure as an immediate return of

On 8/31/23 00:21, Eric Blake wrote: > I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written > eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving > as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a > quickly-written sh or eval plugin, we should not be so insistent as > treating an EPIPE failure as an immediate return of EIO to the client. >

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:40:53AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 8/31/23 00:21, Eric Blake wrote: > > I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written > > eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving > > as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a > > quickly-written sh or eval plugin, we should not be so

I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a quickly-written sh or eval plugin, we should not be so insistent as treating an EPIPE failure as an immediate return of EIO to the client. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake at redhat.com> --- I

On 8/31/23 10:55, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:40:53AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 8/31/23 00:21, Eric Blake wrote: >>> I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written >>> eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving >>> as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a

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 8/31/23 10:02, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:21:19PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: >> I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written >> eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving >> as a data sink can be a somewhat reasonable feature of a >> quickly-written sh or eval plugin, we should not be so

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 11:18:27AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 8/31/23 10:55, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:40:53AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >> On 8/31/23 00:21, Eric Blake wrote: > >>> I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written > >>> eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 12:05:17PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 8/31/23 11:47, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 11:12:59AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >> On 8/31/23 10:02, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:21:19PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > >>>> I hit another transient failure in libnbd

I'm trying to create a language structure that is a call to a function with a number of arguments that is only known at run time. I do this by using repeated indices to expand out a call with a single argument. However, when I change one of the arguments, all are changed. I don't see the same behavior when I initially create a call with multiple arguments. Even more strangely,

Hi! I want to know the way that calls are answer in this case... I have queue1 and queue2, one agent that receive call from both queues. queue1 <- call1 queue1 <- call2 queue2 <- call3 queue2 <- call4 In my test the agent answer calls in this order: call1,call3,call2 and call4. I think this must be in this order call1,call2, call3, call4 like a big FIFO. Its ok this behavior? Could

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

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 11:12:59AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 8/31/23 10:02, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:21:19PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > >> I hit another transient failure in libnbd CI when a poorly-written > >> eval script did not consume all of stdin during .pwrite. As behaving > >> as a data sink can be a