similar to: [LLVMdev] Unable to schedule 'Dominator Tree Construction' required by 'Module Verifier'

Hi Mondi, maybe: don't link your dynamic library against the LLVM libraries. If the tool you load it into is already linked against them (like the opt tool is) then global constructors will be run twice (once when your tool is started and once when the dynamic library is loaded) and strange things will happen. Ciao, Duncan. On 26/07/12 22:27, mondi wrote: > I have a simple parser / JIT

While I'm building 3.0, I thought I would ask if anyone has seen the following with TOT: Unable to schedule 'Dominator Tree Construction' required by 'Module Verifier' Unable to schedule pass UNREACHABLE executed at <root>/llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:1223! Abort This code was working with TOT ~3 weeks ago. This is a code generator, and execution library (the IR C++

Hi there, I’m building llvm for my iOS devices, and all seems to work well, until I try to execute the results: LLVM ERROR: Program used external function '___ltsf2' which could not be resolved! This appears to be part of compiler-rt which as far as I can see should be built / linked automatically when installed correctly? Am I missing something obvious? Thanks, .m

Hi I run into an issue as part of splitting a critical edge during LICM. When a new basic block is created and needs to be added into the dominator tree, the block is already in the dominator tree. I print the dominator tree and I see it is added into the tree as child of node it is supposed to dominate. How do I debug to find out why/when its getting added into the tree. ? Tips/suggestions on

Hi, Can anyone tell me how to traverse Dominator tree in pre-order manner? Regards, Chayan

Hello, I am working on a project that requires me to perform some analysis on a bitcode file outside the existing LLVM analysis frameworks (opt, etc.).  In what I am doing, I need to be able to access the dominator tree for a given function.  Is there a way I can instantiate a DominatorTree object outside the existing analysis frameworks? I have tried several things all along the lines of:

On 7/29/11 10:00 AM, david.dewey at comcast.net wrote: > > John, > > Thanks for the quick reply. Using a PassManager object should work > fine. As you said, my only objection is to exec'ing opt. > > I had actually tried instantiating a PassManager object before, but I > was definitely not doing it right. I will take a look at how clang > and SAFECode use it,

On 7/29/11 9:43 AM, david.dewey at comcast.net wrote: > > Hello, > > I am working on a project that requires me to perform some analysis on > a bitcode file outside the existing LLVM analysis frameworks (opt, > etc.). In what I am doing, I need to be able to access the dominator > tree for a given function. Is there a way I can instantiate a > DominatorTree object

John, Thanks for the quick reply.  Using a PassManager object should work fine.  As you said, my only objection is to exec'ing opt.  I had actually tried instantiating a PassManager object before, but I was definitely not doing it right.  I will take a look at how clang and SAFECode use it, and see if I can get it working. Thanks, David ----- Original Message ----- From:

Chayan Sarkar wrote: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me how to traverse Dominator tree in pre-order manner? > In previous versions of LLVM, I believe you could get some sort of Node object from DominatorTree and then use a method to get the children of the Node (and then use a method of the Node to get the BasicBlock held in that Node). However, I don't see such a method in the

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 7:49 AM, John Criswell <criswell at uiuc.edu> wrote: > Chayan Sarkar wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Can anyone tell me how to traverse Dominator tree in pre-order manner? >> > > In previous versions of LLVM, I believe you could get some sort of Node > object from DominatorTree and then use a method to get the children of > the Node There

Hello, I was wondering whether or not some behaviour that I am seeing is expected behaviour and that it has been designed like this, or not. A dominator relation is given by "if A dominates B", then all paths to B go through A. For example, take the CFG below (which is a directed graph (couldn’t make the arrow heads but ok.): A / \ B C \ / D | E We can construct

I'm trying to update a postdominator tree, but it seems using the DominatorTree family of classes I can't replace the root node of the tree. When the exit block is merged with one its predecessors I need to update the tree to use the new merged root and remove the old node. The changeImmediateDominator functions reject a null replacement immediate dominator and I don't see any way

When looking into https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24866, I discovered that the root cause of the crash is that I was expecting every basic block to have a corresponding Node in the dominator tree. Apparently, the "while.end" basic block in the example does not have a Node in the Dominator Tree. Can anyone tell me if this is expected? If so, under what circumstances?

Hi, I am working on a pass aimed to unify multiple exits of a loop into a unique basic block. The approach is straight forward: I create a unique BasicBlock BB_unique that has as predecessors all the exit blocks of the loop, it contains a phi instruction and a switch to redirect the flow correctly. Additionally, for each initial exit block I create an associated block that will jump to the

Hi, I need to collapse a list into a string and then reparse it back into the list. Normally when I need to do this I simply use write.csv and read.csv, but I need to do this in memory within R rather than writing out to file. Are there any bespoke commands that any knows of that does something like this or any tips for doing this that anyone can suggest? I basically don't care

On Oct 11, 2010, at 9:05 AM, Xinfinity wrote: > > Hi, > > I am working on a pass aimed to unify multiple exits of a loop into a unique > basic block. The approach is straight forward: > I create a unique BasicBlock BB_unique that has as predecessors all the exit > blocks of the loop, it contains a phi instruction and a switch to redirect > the flow correctly.

Nope, I parse the first time, and then reparse everytime something changes in my text buffer (because I syntax color based on what libclang gives me). And it worked fine (and fast) with clang_defaultEditingTranslationUnitOptions for clang_parseTranslationUnit and clang_defaultReparseOptions for clang_reparseTranslationUnit. Until I saw that clang_codeCompleteAt doesnt work with anything else than

Hey everyone! I'm having trouble finding the optimal performance settings for parsing/reparsing the translation unit. At this moment I'm using CXTranslationUnit_None for both parsing and reparsing the translation unit, because it seems that as soon as I turn on default settings for parse/reparse (clang_defaultEditingTranslationUnitOptions and clang_defaultReparseOptions respectively) code

I just finished upgrading our LLVM to 2.4 and I immediately ran into a problem with dominance frontier calculation: llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:714: void llvm::PMDataManager::verifyDomInfo(llvm::Pass&, llvm::Function&): Assertion `0 && "Invalid dominator info"' failed. Strangely enough, the Pass running when the assert triggers is Dominance Frontier