similar to: [LLVMdev] opt -O3 causes Assertion `New->getType() == getType() && "replaceAllUses of value with new value of different type!"' failed

Hi Hal, I have filed http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16780 -Milind On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Milind, > > Have you filed a bug on this? If not, can you please open a bug report (http://llvm.org/bugs)? > > -Hal > > ----- Original Message ----- >> I am hitting an LLVM assertion from the llc tool iff the bitcode

Milind, Have you filed a bug on this? If not, can you please open a bug report (http://llvm.org/bugs)? -Hal ----- Original Message ----- > I am hitting an LLVM assertion from the llc tool iff the bitcode file > is optimized at -O3 level by opt). -O1 and -O2 levels of opt do not > cause this assert. > > LLVM version 3.4svn > DEBUG build with assertions. > Built Jul 14

Hi, I don't see the LLVM bug I filed (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16780) making any progress. Can someone suggest me whether the bug is in the correct state? -Milind On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Milind Chabbi <Milind.Chabbi at rice.edu> wrote: > Hi Hal, > > I have filed http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16780 > > -Milind > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at

Some time ago we reported a compile-time performance regression in the LiveIntervals analysis pass (see http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18580). We detected it at first after migrating from LLVM 3.1 to 3.3, but the problem persists also in 3.5. This regression is especially critical when compiling long functions. In one of our benchmarks compile time goes from 200s (in 3.1) up to 1500s (in

[AMD Official Use Only - Internal Distribution Only] Hi , There seems to be some issue with attributor, exactly in File Attributor.cpp, Function Attributor::rewriteFunctionSignatures(), Line No: 1600 (approrimate). The llvm source code at above address is as follows: // Eliminate the instructions *after* we visited all of them. for (auto &CallSitePair : CallSitePairs) {

Hi Suresh, thanks for reporting this! I thought I fixed this with 8d94d3c3b44c3a27a69b153cef9be4b8e481150e. Did you run before or after that commit? Cheers, Johannes On 5/15/20 7:17 AM, Mani, Suresh via llvm-dev wrote: > [AMD Public Use] > > Hi , > > Please ignore the earlier header of Internal and Official use only. > > Thanks > M Suresh > > From: llvm-dev

Hi All, Has vmkit been updated and tested with LLVM 2.8? I am unable to build it (llvm builds fine). There were some errors with Makefile.rules: $(Verb) $(LLVMAS) -f $(<F) -o - | $(LLC) -march=cpp -cppgen=contents -o $@ (march and cppgen options not recognized). What I cannot get past is this one (the warnings concern me as well): ... make[3]: Leaving directory

Hello, I wonder if someone would know what is going on below. All of a sudden I’m getting this assertion thrown: Assertion failed: (New->getType() == getType() && "replaceAllUses of value with new value of different type!"), function replaceAllUsesWith, file /Users/meister/Development/externals-clasp/llvm36/lib/IR/Value.cpp, line 345. It’s happening when

Hi everyone, We are using the llvm2cpp feature of LLVM in the VMKit project and there are some issues that I would like to point out. I made a tiny reproducible example here, to be clear: echo "int main() { return 0; };" > test.c && clang test.c -emit-llvm -c -o - | llc -march=cpp -cppgen=function -cppfor=main -o - This command is supposed to generate the C++ code to

I forgot to mention this in my initial email. The build of LLVM that I was using was commit a0d5d7aed8e177cea381b3d054d80c212ece9f2c The date on the commit is: Date: Fri Sep 26 12:34:06 2014 Also: Today I grabbed the ToT llvm/clang/clang-extra-tools and I’m working on getting my code to be compatible with it. I can switch back and forth between the current ToT llvm and the old one. Thanks,

+Bill who worked on the attribute change On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Harris BAKIRAS <h.bakiras at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > We are using the llvm2cpp feature of LLVM in the VMKit project and there are > some issues that I would like to point out. > > I made a tiny reproducible example here, to be clear: > > echo "int main() { return 0; };"

Hello. I'm getting the following error after adding some extra instrumentation in a module (LoopVectorize.cpp ) due to a bug in Value::replaceAllUsesWith (see more comments of mine below): Value::replaceAllUsesWith(New = i16* inttoptr (i16 51 to i16*)), this = %VectorGep = getelementptr i16, i16* inttoptr (i16 51 to i16*), <128 x i64> zeroinitializer, !dbg !17 ; this

> On 2015-Jan-19, at 12:38, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 19, 2015, at 12:04 PM, Christian Schafmeister <chris.schaf at verizon.net> wrote: >> >> >> I forgot to mention this in my initial email. >> >> The build of LLVM that I was using was commit a0d5d7aed8e177cea381b3d054d80c212ece9f2c >> The date on the

vmkit fails to build because llvm-as with llc -march=cpp generate wrong code for AttrListPtr AttrListPtr::get(ArrayRef< AttributeWithIndex >Attrs) http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1AttrListPtr.html#a3a19622d131e9f0d981398f54cf6acfc bellow you can see the faulty generated code llvm-as ./vmkit/lib/vmkit/Compiler/LLVMRuntime.ll -o - | llc -march=cpp -cppgen=contents -o - | grep

On May 26, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > In Unladen Swallow we (intend to) compile each function as we > determine it's hot. To "compile" a function means to translate it from > CPython bytecode to LLVM IR, optimize the IR using a > FunctionPassManager, and JIT the IR to machine code. We'd like to > include inlining among our optimizations. Currently

In Unladen Swallow we (intend to) compile each function as we determine it's hot. To "compile" a function means to translate it from CPython bytecode to LLVM IR, optimize the IR using a FunctionPassManager, and JIT the IR to machine code. We'd like to include inlining among our optimizations. Currently the Inliner is a CallGraphSCCPass, which can only be run by the

James, Thanks. It wouldn't take the LTO option; however, I can get it to inline using -cppgen=inline. However, when I run clang the second time it gives me an error, stating that it expects a top level entity. I think I've run into this issue before. Any ideas? On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM, James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > I see. Well,

Hi, I'm experiencing a weird problem with llvm 3.7(rc2/rc3) that did not occur in llvm 3.6.2 I created a bug for it: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24521 I'm building a app where multiple code gen can happen in parallel. The documentation state that I need to use separate context. Each thread has it's own context. When code generating a constant number I use the *InContext()

Several instruction classes override getType() when the instruction always creates a particular type of value. For example, the result of insertelement is always a vector, so InsertElementInst overrides getType() to return a VectorType*. This makes perfect sense. However, ExtractValueInst and InsertValueInst override getType() to return a PointerType*, which does not make sense and is

Hi, I want to create a double constant from a float constant, here's my code: auto* constFloat1 = static_cast<llvm::ConstantFP*>(llvm::ConstantFP::get(llvm::Type::getFloatTy(context), 3.1)); assert(constFloat1->getType() == llvm::Type::getFloatTy(context)); auto* constFloat2 = llvm::ConstantFP::get(llvm::Type::getDoubleTy(context), constFloat1->getValueAPF());