similar to: [LLVMdev] Merge 2 BasicBlocks

Hi Rinaldini, In order to find information about loops inside a given function you should use something like "LoopInfo *LI = P->getAnalysis<LoopInfo>()", remembering to add "AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();" to your getAnalysisUsage method. If the function you are interested to is not located in the module being compiled (if you created it as an auxiliary function,

Hi, I'm trying to detect if a basicblock is part of a loop or not. I tried the llvm::LoopInfo like that (http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1LoopInfo.html#a4abca289c73cd09487e05d11d9f7d877): LoopInfo *loop = new LoopInfo(); bool isLoop = loop->getLoopFor(myBB); // getLoopFor - Return the inner most loop that BB lives in. If a basic block is in no loop (for example the entry

Rinaldini, What exactly did you run? Specifically, you may be missing some analysis passes that are necessary for LoopInfo to have the loop information you desire. -Hal On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:02:04 +0000 Rinaldini Julien <julien.rinaldini at heig-vd.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to detect if a basicblock is part of a loop or not. > > I tried the llvm::LoopInfo

Hi, I have a question about the llvm passes. I'm iterating over a basicblock and I can get an instruction and print it. Now, I want to iterate over the instruction and be able to modify the values of the instruction. For example, if my instruction is an add "<result> = add i32 4, %var" I want to transform it in a sub "<result> = sub i32 4, %var". I looked up

Hi, I'm writing a pass that implements a jump table with an array of blockaddress and an indirectbr instruction. It get a blockaddress in the array (via getelementptr and an index) and then jump to this basicblock via the indirectbr. I tried to compile several libraries to test my pass and the run their test-suite. It works fine with, for e.g, libTomCrypt (in -O0,1,2,3). With GMP or

> On 24 Mar 2015, at 14:55, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Rinaldini Julien > <julien.rinaldini at heig-vd.ch> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I want to *tag* some functions with some *flags*. I was using annotate((“myFlag”)) and everything was working fine until I tried on ObjC method. It seems that clang just

It try to put all basicblock in a switch in a loop, like that for example: int main() { if(something) somethingelse: else another; } become: int main() { while(true) { switch(var) { case 0: if(something) var+=1; else: var+=2; break; case1:

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) {

Hi, Depending on what have run before your pass, the loop may have been unrolled or simplified if the computation inside the loop is too simple. Cheers, -- Arnaud de Grandmaison ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Cristianno Martins [cristiannomartins at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 5:52 PM To:

>> // Increment loop variable and jmp >> BuildMI(*MBB_erase, MBB_erase->end(), db, >> TII->get(X86::ADD64ri32),reg).addReg(reg).addImm(8); > > It looks like this instruction is defining virtual register "reg" the second time. Thx for your answer... Why would it define it again? I just want to use this register and add something to it... Cheers

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

Hi, I want to *tag* some functions with some *flags*. I was using annotate((“myFlag”)) and everything was working fine until I tried on ObjC method. It seems that clang just ignore it. So, to be able to *flag* my functions I’m trying to add a *real* attribute to clang. I’ve added a new attribute to clang in tools/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td: def NoFLA : Attr { let Spellings =

Re-adding the list, below message was sent to me alone: On 11 August 2011 13:45, Rinaldini Julien <julien.rinaldini at heig-vd.ch> wrote: > Thx for all answers... > > I'll try that. But in a long term what I want to do will be a bit more complicated... It was just an example. In this case, the goal is to replace all add with sub that return the same result, like: > > var

> De : 陳韋任 [chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw] > Date d'envoi : mardi 8 mai 2012 11:37 > À : Rinaldini Julien > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Objet : Re: [LLVMdev] RE : svn trunk comilation error > > Hi Rinaldini, > > You probably need to illustrate what your enviroment is, what revision you > checkout and how you build LLVM. I have no problem build LLVM svn here.

> De : 陳韋任 [chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw] > Date d'envoi : mardi 8 mai 2012 11:37 > À : Rinaldini Julien > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Objet : Re: [LLVMdev] RE : svn trunk comilation error > > Hi Rinaldini, > > You probably need to illustrate what your enviroment is, what revision you > checkout and how you build LLVM. I have no problem build LLVM svn here.

Hi, Thx for your help... Here is the IR code: ; ModuleID = 'foo_bar.c' target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [6 x i8] c"MAIN\0A\00", align 1 ; Function Attrs: nounwind uwtable define i32 @main(i32 %argc, i8** %argv) #0 { entry: %retval = alloca i32,

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

Hi, I'm having trouble using virtual register in the X86 backend. I implemented a new intrinsic and I use a custom inserter. The goal of the intrinsic is to set the content of the stack to zero at the end of each function. Here is my code: MachineBasicBlock * X86TargetLowering::EmitBURNSTACKWithCustomInserter( MachineInstr *MI, MachineBasicBlock

Hi ! I'm trying to modify the code in a machine function pass… I added a new basicblock and I want to add a jump to an another BB from my new BB. Here is my code : bool Obfuscation::runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &MF) { MachineBasicBlock *newEntry = MF.CreateMachineBasicBlock(); MF.insert(MF.begin(), newEntry); std::vector<MachineBasicBlock*> origBB;

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