similar to: [LLVMdev] Instruction insertion By Module Pass

Thank you for your help I tried Instruction* p=&( Bb->front()); Type * Int32Type = IntegerType::getInt32Ty(getGlobalContext()); AllocaInst* newInst = new AllocaInst(Int32Type,"flag", p); that works well but I need to store the value of the variable too. What's the method that could be used to store specific value?? On 30 July 2013 16:01, John Criswell

On 7/30/13 7:44 AM, Rasha Omar wrote: > Hi, > I need to insert new instruction into every basic block like x=1 > or while loop > I tried this code, but it doesn't work > > Type * Int32Type = IntegerType::getInt32Ty(getGlobalContext()); > AllocaInst* newInst = new AllocaInst(Int32Type,"flag", Bb); > Bb->getInstList().push_back(newInst); The problem is

Hi, For the following code const Type * Int32Type = IntegerType::getInt32Ty(getGlobalContext()); AllocaInst* newInst = new AllocaInst(Int32Type, 0, "flag", Bb); Bb->getInstList().push_back(newInst); It gives me the error " error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'llvm::AllocaInst' AllocaInst* newInst = new

Hi, Can anyone tell me if there's a straighforward way to create a new BasicBlock without inserting it into a function's basic block list? I want to do this so I can create a forward reference to a block that's position in the function is not yet known. I've tried: Function function Builder builder; bb = BasicBlock::Create(function,...) bb.eraseFromParent() ... add other

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:27 PM, James Williams <junk at giantblob.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me if there's a straighforward way to create a new > BasicBlock without inserting it into a function's basic block list? I want > to do this so I can create a forward reference to a block that's position in > the function is not yet known. > > I've

Your question isn't clear; please restate what specifically isn't working. -Eli On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Rasha Omar <rasha.sala7 at gmail.com> wrote: > or like this > > %cmp4 = icmp eq i32 %rem, 0 > > br i1 %cmp4, label %if.then5, label %if.else7 > > > On 14 August 2013 20:08, Rasha Omar <rasha.sala7 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi

Hi All, How could I use BranchInst to implement for example br label %if.else7 br label %if.then5 br i1 %cmp4, label %if.then5, label %if.else7 I can use BranchInst for only one instruction but how could I compare between two branches Thanks -- * Rasha Salah Omar Msc Student at E-JUST Demonestrator at Faculty of Computers and Informatics Benha University* *

How could BranchInst be used to insert new branch between two basic blocks to get result like this example: br label %if.else br label %if.then br i1 %cmp1, label %if.then, label %if.else Thanks for your help On 14 August 2013 21:36, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > Your question isn't clear; please restate what specifically isn't working. > > -Eli

Hi, Thank Brian Gaeke so much. Following TraceBasicBlocks.cpp, I modified the code as below and could insert instruction or function I need into anywhere in Module. But it works well without BB->getInstList().push_back(InstrCall), and if I add the BB->getInstList().push_back() following new CallInst(), I got error information when runing opt. What is the reason for it? And is it necessary

or like this %cmp4 = icmp eq i32 %rem, 0 br i1 %cmp4, label %if.then5, label %if.else7 On 14 August 2013 20:08, Rasha Omar <rasha.sala7 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > How could I use BranchInst to implement for example > br label %if.else7 > br label %if.then5 > br i1 %cmp4, label %if.then5, label %if.else7 > > I can use BranchInst for only one

Hi All, AllocaInst * AI = builder.CreateAlloca(type, 0, BBName); StoreInst* ST= builderTF.CreateStore(ConstantInt::get(type,1),AI); Value * Vresult = (Value*)ST; Vresult = builderWait.CreateShl(Vresult, 1); I need to make one bit shift left to the variable stored in the second step I've got crash in this step opt: /home/xx/llvm2/llvm/include/llvm/Support/Casting.h:237: typename

I have Function Function* F; and one of its basic blocks BB I want to insert this BB into a new function without remove it from the original according that BList is the list of the basic blocks of the newFunction BList.insert(BB); but I don't want to call BB->removeFromParent(); and without this method it give me error that BB is already in a container is there another function that get

Hi All, I need to call global variable by its name from the following code for(Function::iterator i=F->begin();i!=F->end();++i) { BasicBlock*Bb =&*i; GlobalVariable* GV = new GlobalVariable(type,false, F->getLinkage(),0, "F$"+Bb->getName()); GV->setInitializer(Constant::getNullValue (typ)); GList.push_back(GV); } Could I solve that by

Hi All, I need to remove successors from every basic block to insert new ones I tried this code, but it doesn't work void RemoveSuccessor(TerminatorInst *TI, unsigned SuccNum) { assert(SuccNum < TI->getNumSuccessors() && "Trying to remove a nonexistant successor!"); // If our old successor block contains any PHI nodes, remove the entry in the //

Hi, Is changing the successors for each basic blocks means by default that the Terminator Instruction will be changed or this is another problem should be solved? If case 2 please tell me how to change it according to the new successors? Thanks -- * Rasha Salah Omar Msc Student at E-JUST Demonestrator at Faculty of Computers and Informatics Benha University* * e-mail:

BB: %4= load i32* @"FB" %5 = icmp ne i32 %4, 0 br i1 %5, label %BB1, label %BB2 The error after $clang -pthread MyNew.ll -o MyNew Instruction does not dominate all uses! Could you help for this ? -- * Rasha Salah Omar Msc Student at E-JUST Demonestrator at Faculty of Computers and Informatics Benha University* * e-mail: rasha.omar at ejust.edu.eg*

Hi Rasha, > Is changing the successors for each basic blocks means by default that the > Terminator Instruction will be changed or this is another problem should be > solved? I think the only way you *can* change a basic block's successors is by changing its terminator instruction, so "by default" is the closest answer. Though you should make sure your basic block only has

Hi Rasha, > Instruction does not dominate all uses! There should be two instructions printed after that message. The first defines a value used by the second, but the message means there's some path through your function that can reach the second inst (the use) without the value being defined by the first instruction. At its simplest you probably want to decide what that value should be

> How could this crash be fixed? What you've basically written is: %AI = alloca i32 %Vresult = store i32 1, i32* %AI %res = shl i32 %Vresult, 1 The problem is that stores don't produce values that can be used elsewhere (they have type "void"). If you want to shift a variable like "AI" in LLVM you have to load it, do the shift and then store it again.

I think I understood that, but what I mean is what is the function responsible to do mapping is it MapValue() in ValueMapper.h? Thanks for your help On 6 June 2013 09:54, Alexandru Ionut Diaconescu < alexandruionutdiaconescu at gmail.com> wrote: > Map every basic block from the CFG to a set of integers. The successors > from the CFG can be used to make the edges in your simplified