similar to: [LLVMdev] cyclical use between caller and callee

2013/3/27 Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca>: >The common idiom to delete any Value* is: > > V->replaceAllUsesWith(UndefValue::get(V->getType()); > V->eraseFromParent(); > > Does that work for functions? You may need to make sure the 'undef' has a > pointer to function type instead of the function type. > I tried this code sample, passing the type

2013/3/27 Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca>: > charles quarra wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have two functions in a module, X.foo, which is the callee, and >> Y.foo2, which calls X.foo. >> >> If i either try to run llvm::Function::eraseFromParent() on any one of >> the functions, i'll >> get this assertion error: >> >> F is

Hi, I have two functions in a module, X.foo, which is the callee, and Y.foo2, which calls X.foo. If i either try to run llvm::Function::eraseFromParent() on any one of the functions, i'll get this assertion error: F is used in instruction: %"calling function" = call i32 @X.foo(i32 %read) F is used in instruction: %"calling function" = call i32 @X.foo(i32 %read) While

Hello Visual Studio is complaining about the mix of struct and class. 2>C:\dev\llvm\include\llvm/ADT/ValueMap.h(202) : warning C4099: 'llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::ValueMapCallbackVH<KeyT,ValueT,Config,ValueInfoT>>' : type name first seen using 'struct' now seen using 'class' 2> C:\dev\llvm\include\llvm/ADT/ValueMap.h(251) : see reference to class

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to implement Available Expressions data flow analysis. I created > the following class (I am giving here code snippet.): > > namespace { > typedef DenseMap<Expression, uint32_t> DMTy; //Expression is a class I > defined. > struct DataFlowValue { >

Hi, I am trying to implement Available Expressions data flow analysis. I created the following class (I am giving here code snippet.): namespace { typedef DenseMap<Expression, uint32_t> DMTy; //Expression is a class I defined. struct DataFlowValue { DMTy ExprMap; llvm::BitVector* DFV; // Functions operating on the data // bool operator==(const DataFlowValue V) const;

I'm getting seemingly odd SegFaults when writing out using a raw_fd_ostream in the current trunk (last version worked, believe it was 153818, or similar). Again, nothing in the release notes... should I be scanning the svn log? For example, I have something like: raw_fd_ostream fout("out.txt", errorStr=""); .... fout<<"Hello World, how are you!"\n";

Cygwin's <stdint.h> defines uint32_t as "unsigned long". I think this is valid, but it causes various problems like this when building LLVM with GCC 3.4.4: .../lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAG.cpp:3440: error: call of overloaded `AddInteger(uint32_t)' is ambiguous .../lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAG.cpp:1429: error: no matching function for call to `max(long

It looks like some kind of file IO buffer overflow. I'm not dumping any long strings at one time, but I am keeping the file open for the entire run. I've yet to find a correlation to other C files. On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm getting seemingly odd SegFaults when writing out using a > raw_fd_ostream in the current

So I did a clean checkout and build and still have this issue, did something changed with the way/when it's getting flushed? My old revision did not have this issue, this is an issue strictly with LLVM it seems. On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > It looks like some kind of file IO buffer overflow. I'm not dumping any > long strings

Hi, After building out project in release mode, caught an assertion, which we have not seen before: hello_f: /tmp/rpmbuild_debug/BUILD/llvm/build/include/llvm/ADT/DenseMap.h:126: void llvm::DenseMap<KeyT, ValueT, KeyInfoT>::clear() [with KeyT = llvm::MachineBasicBlock*, ValueT = <unnamed>::BlockChain*, KeyInfoT = llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::MachineBasicBlock*>]: Assertion

Dear NVPTX community, I've create a bug http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13521 with reprocase for this issue. Please, help us to fix it. Last 1,5 months we regularly encounter & workaround or fix 1-2 bugs per week in NVPTX backend. This is definitely not the amount of work we can completely serve ourselves... We would really really appreciate some collaboration. Thanks, - D.

Unfortunately, I cannot reproduce this. Based on your bugzilla comment, it does look like a mis-compile with your system compiler. Does the same issue occur if you build LLVM as static libraries? On 08/03/2012 12:24 AM, Dmitry N. Mikushin wrote: > Dear NVPTX community, > > I've create a bug http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13521 with > reprocase for this issue. > >

Hi there, I'm currently writing an analysis (for now) pass for LLVM that kind of need some information from the CallGraph of the program. This info would be extremely easy to get if I could build the DominatorTree information about the CallGraph. I even checked out and saw the declarations of GraphTraits templates for CallGraph and CallGraphNode, which might indicate that all algorithms that

+template <bool, typename True, typename False> +struct If { typedef True Result; }; + +template <typename True, typename False> +struct If<false, True, False> { typedef False Result; }; These should probably go into include/llvm/Support/type_traits.h. In C++0x, this is named "conditional" (section 20.6.7), so I think you should use the same name, despite the standard

+ // Otherwise this is a copy constructor for const_iterator. Do you mean "for iterator"? Otherwise, looks good to me. If you can commit this, please do. Otherwise, someone else should as I'm not going to be around tomorrow. On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Victor Zverovich <victor.zverovich at googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi Jeffrey, > You are right that the generated

Reminding about the patches... Is there a problem with them or simply nobody have looked at them since? Victor 2009/11/4 Victor Zverovich <victor.zverovich at googlemail.com> > Good catch! I meant "for iterator" of course. Attached is a corrected patch > together with an old patch for clang just to keep them together. > Could someone commit these, please? > >

Hi Jeffrey, You are right that the generated copy constructor is used for const_iterator. I have added a comment clarifying this. Also I have added the tests you suggested and corrected the comparison operators. Please find attached the updated patches. Best regards, Victor 2009/11/3 Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at google.com> > +template <bool, typename True, typename False> >

Good catch! I meant "for iterator" of course. Attached is a corrected patch together with an old patch for clang just to keep them together. Could someone commit these, please? Thanks, Victor 2009/11/4 Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at google.com> > + // Otherwise this is a copy constructor for const_iterator. > > Do you mean "for iterator"? > > Otherwise,

Hi all, I'm dealing with the multi-threaded code, in one of executions of the program I hitting an assertion failure, I'm not always getting the assertion failure when I run the executable but it occurs for say (1 in 10) times. I think there may be an thread race condition. I don't know which is the root cause of this error because the assertion not explicitly occurs in my code, it