similar to: [LLVMdev] undefined symbol: _ZTIN4llvm10ModulePassE

Hi Andy, > I would think you could use a simple allocation scheme on the host side and then allocate a single block (or perhaps one code block and one data block) in the target process to receive everything, since everything is loaded on the host before you need to copy it to the target process. But perhaps I'm missing something regarding your particular scenario. > In any event,

>> To increase stability for us we have already moved the main part of the compilation to a separate process that may crash in case of an error without doing much harm, i.e. does not crash the database. > Were there any interesting challenges that arose during this process? > This seems to be an approach many folks are either taking or > considering. If there are things we could

Hi All, I was checking for GIT or SVN versions corresponding to llvm3.1 release by checking svn and git logs, but failed to find the exact match. I checked with r156747, which is the last version it shows in      http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_31/ but when I 'diff' this with the 'downloaded llvm3.1 release'(http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.1), then I

Hey Duncan, Thanks! I figured out this piece of code finally: Value *gep = call->getArgOperand(0); if ( ConstantExpr *pCE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(gep) ) { Value *firstop = pCE->getOperand(0); if (GlobalVariable *GV = dyn_cast<GlobalVariable>(firstop)){ Constant *v = GV->getInitializer(); if

HI Duncan, Your understanding of the problem is correct. However, the XYZ class is not inside an anonymous name space. Also, all the XYZ methods are defined in the .cpp file. Looking at the error message: opt: symbol lookup error: path/to/pass.so: undefined symbol: _ZN12DataTransferD1Ev Where DataTransfer is the class name. Maybe I am missing certain type of constructors? Thanks, Welson On

Hi Team, I am migrating one of the Pass that was written for llvm2.2 or older to llvm3.1. The code snippet looks like the following: Constant *func; void add( Module *M) { func = M->getOrInsertFunction("func", Type::getVoidTy(M->getContext()), NULL); } virtual bool runOnModule(Module &M) { add (&M); for(Module::iterator F = M.begin(), E = M.end(); F !=

Hi Guys, I am using the Postdom pass and I would like to get the root of the tree. However, everytime I try to get the root, I get a segfault. I don't know why the environment can't find DominatorTreeBase. Below is the code that generates the Segfault. In my .h file I include Dominators.h PDT.getRootNode(); //PDT is a reference to a PostDominatorTree dyld: lazy symbol binding

Hi Ahmad, On 03/01/13 16:26, Hassan, Ahmad wrote: > Hi Team, > > I am migrating one of the Pass that was written for llvm2.2 or older to llvm3.1. > The code snippet looks like the following: > > Constant *func; > > void add( Module *M) { > > func = M->getOrInsertFunction("func", Type::getVoidTy(M->getContext()), NULL); this function has no

Originally, the problem is the lack of .cpp file. Then I noticed the compilation log is not showing the .o file being generated for the non-pass classes. Then I added the .cpp files for each .h file, then the .o files are being generated, shown in the Debug directory. Actually, if I add "VERBOSE = 1" in the Makefile, it shows the linking command is actually linking all the .o files into

Hi Welson, > Yes, it is a ConstantExpr! Thank you! > > Now trying to find a clue in ConstantExpr's functions to get that string :-) you can get the pointer operand by doing: getOperand(0) The i'th index is getOperand(i+1). Ciao, Duncan. > > Regards, > Welson > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr > <mailto:baldrick at

Won't it be http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_31/final/ On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Pankaj Gode <godepankaj at yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I was checking for GIT or SVN versions corresponding to llvm3.1 release by > checking svn and git logs, but failed to find the exact match. > > I checked with r156747, which is the last version it shows

Hi Welson, are you saying that the .o file containing the class is being linked into the .so file, but nonetheless you get "undefined symbol XYZ" errors where XYZ is that class? Maybe you defined the class inside an anonymous name space? Alternatively, if XYZ refers to a method of the class, maybe you forgot to define that method. Ciao, Duncan. On 01/03/12 17:36, Welson Sun wrote:

Yeah. Is there a way to specify noalias between these arguments? On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek < kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 9/21/2012 4:35 PM, Welson Sun wrote: > >> Dear LLVM, >> >> I would like to understand how to improve the LLVM alias analysis >> accuracy. I am currently using llvmgcc 2.9 and llvm 3.0. Here is the C

Thanks Duncan, Yes, it is a ConstantExpr! Thank you! Now trying to find a clue in ConstantExpr's functions to get that string :-) Regards, Welson On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Welson Sun, > > > Hi, if I have some LLVM code like this: > > > > @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [7 x i8]

Hi Welson, > In case "my_pass" is compiled into a standalone executable, how can I run the > specific alias analysis in the code? I suggest you work out what passing -basic-aa to opt does, how it works, and do the same in your code. Ciao, Duncan. > > Thanks > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr > <mailto:baldrick at

Thanks Duncan! You are right! If I type the command "opt -basicaa -mypass ...", then the output makes sense. Now, how can you specify which AA to use in the code? Regards, Welson On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Welson, the default alias analysis is -no-aa. As the name suggests it > just returns MayAlias for everything.

I think you may add restrict type qualifier. Sam From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Welson Sun Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 5:50 PM To: Krzysztof Parzyszek Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Alias Analysis accuracy Yeah. Is there a way to specify noalias between these arguments? On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Krzysztof

Can you give an example? And is this limited to C (not C++) only? On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Liu, Yaxun (Sam) <Yaxun.Liu at amd.com> wrote: > I think you may add restrict type qualifier.**** > > ** ** > > Sam**** > > ** ** > > *From:* llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] *On > Behalf Of *Welson Sun > *Sent:* Friday,

Hello, Is there any package to install llvm 3.1 on solaris?  Standard installation by compiling the sources does not run smoothly. I found that similar issues have been addressed before, but without replies: http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Using-Clang-LLVM-on-sparc-solaris-td2807126.html I tried to install llvm 3.1 on a system with Sun Microsystems Inc.   SunOS 5.10      Generic

Good to hear that. Doesn't seem to be a popular combination since googling results little information on this. Is it possible for you to show the changes to LLVM? Personally I don't like STLport, not sure the real benefit versus using compiler's STL. On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Villmow, Micah <Micah.Villmow at amd.com>wrote: > We are able to compile it internally,