similar to: [LLVMdev] error in InsertElementInst

Does anyone know how to instrument *double* to <2 x doulbe>**, e.g., 2.2 --> <2.2, 2.2>? For example, I want to change the following IR code %arrayidx1 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x double]* @main.B, i32 0, i32 %i.021 %1 = load double* %arrayidx1, align 4, !tbaa !0 to: %arrayidx1 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x double]* @main.B, i32 0, i32 %i.021 %1 = bitcast double* %arrayidx1

Hello, I am create a <3 x i32> vector in LLVM IR. Then I insert 3 instructions and later on I try to load one instruction from the vector. The insertion seems to work, however, when I try to load a specific instruction from a vector I seems that it does not work. This is the part of my IR: %"ins or1" = insertelement <3 x i32> undef, i32 %38, i32 0 %"ins and2"

Thanks Nick, that's something what I am trying to implement as the following. But it seems I still only get the constant value not the instruction. Could you please go over the following instruction and see what wrong with it? Thanks for your time again. Value *vecVal = NULL; IRBuilder<> builder(&*pInst); Type *vecTy = VectorType::get(Type::getDoubleTy(ctxt), 2); Value

Hello everybody, I have developed a pass to identify the loops in a bitcode file. For files less than 1500 lines of code I am able to identify all the loops, however if the file is bigger I cannot find any of the loops. Is there any limit or something about the LoopInfo? Regards, Vasileios

I got it. Thanks, Nick. So, it is back to the previous problem. If I have the following instruction: %3 = fadd double %1, double %2 I want to change it into %6 = fadd <2 x double> %4, double %5 where %4 = <double %1, double %1>, %5 = <double %2, double %2>, how can I do this? Thanks, Best On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: >

It seems that the problem was because I used builder.CreateFAdd to create a <2 x double> vectortype FADD instruction. It works if I use it to create the scalar version FADD. I want to have an instruction like: *%2 = fadd <2 x double> undef, <2 x double> undef. *The following is the way I used to create the vectorized FADD instruction: //pInst is a double type instruction

On Apr 23, 2012, at 2:14 PM, Roland Leißa <leissa at cs.uni-saarland.de> wrote: >>> ok, I now have a problem in the code generator. >>> Let's say I want to set a breakpoint somewhere in >>> clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp >>> >>> What do I have to do in order to trigger breakpoints, see >>> backtraces and so on? >>

Hi Jim, thanks for replying. As mentioned in my earlier mail, I have to specify -emit-obj along with -cc1 in order to trigger codegen. This solves the problem for me. As I learned from the last email, specifying -v is a good starting point in order to see what actually is happening and tackle such problems. -- Roland ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Grosbach"

Hello, I am creating a new instruction and I want to replace the use of a specified instruction. This is the code I have written Instruction *new_instr = BinaryOperator::Create(Instruction::Sub, op1, op2, ""); b->getInstList().insertAfter(old_instr, new_instr); //b is the BasicBlock old_instr->replaceAllUsesWith(new_instr); old_instr->eraseFromParent(); When I print the

Hi all, with r49277 I have checked in the API changes for the first wave of modifications related to the size reduction of Use objects. Several creation methods take the place of the previously used "operator new". I have changed the llvm-gcc4.2 and clang projects, but if you have any llvm projects that tracks the SVN trunk of the API you will have to upgrade. in *tcsh* I have used

> > ok, I now have a problem in the code generator. > > Let's say I want to set a breakpoint somewhere in > > clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp > > > > What do I have to do in order to trigger breakpoints, see > > backtraces and so on? > > You set a breakpoint and ask to see a backtrace? > > -eric haha, OK, I think I should be more specific.

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

On 12/02/2011 06:32 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 17:07 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 11/23/2011 05:52 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>>> > Tobias, >>>>>> > >>>>>>

Hola LLVMers, I was curious about the state of stack alignment on x86. I noticed there are a few bugs outstanding on the issue. I recently added some code which had the effect of throwing an extra function parameter on our stack at runtime, a 4 byte pointer. Esp is now not 16-byte aligned, so instructions like unpcklps xmm1, dword ptr [eps] cause grief. My AllocaInstr instructions are

Andy, Here is the left circular shift operator patch. I apologize to the reviewer in advance. The patch has a good bit of fine detail. Any comments/criticisms? Some caveats... 1) This is just the bare minimum needed to make the left circular shift operator work (e.g. no instruction combining). 2) I tried my best to select operator names in the existing style; please feel free to change them as

On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 17:07 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 11/23/2011 05:52 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > >> > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> > > Tobias, > >>> > > > >>> > > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes

Tobias, I've attached an updated copy of the patch. I believe that I accounted for all of your suggestions except for: 1. You said that I could make AA a member of the class and initialize it for each basic block. I suppose that I'd need to make it a pointer, but more generally, what is the thread-safely model that I should have in mind for the analysis passes (will multiple threads

Hi Chuck! On Jul 20, 2007, at 11:36 AM, Chuck Rose III wrote: > Hola LLVMers, > > > > I’m looking to make use of the vectorization primitives in the > Intel chip with the code we generate from LLVM and so I’ve started > experimenting with it. What is the state of the machine code > generated for vectors? In my tinkering, I seem to be getting some > wonky

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Chuck Rose III wrote: > I'm looking to make use of the vectorization primitives in the Intel > chip with the code we generate from LLVM and so I've started > experimenting with it. What is the state of the machine code generated > for vectors? In my tinkering, I seem to be getting some wonky machine > instructions, but I'm most likely just doing

From: Raphael S. Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> MultiFS depends on the availability of partiter to find a partition. Signed-off-by: Raphael S. Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> --- com32/chain/Makefile | 2 +- com32/chain/chain.c | 4 +- com32/chain/mangle.c | 4 +- com32/chain/mangle.h | 2 +-