similar to: [LLVMdev] How to tell whether a GlobalValue is user-defined

I think this is preventing constants in the constant pool (e.g., floating point literal) from being placed in the mergeable constant sections? We want to keep the const arrays declared in the program (s_dashArraySize1) out of the mergeable constant sections, but don't mind placing constants in the constant pool or constant arrays that the compiler defines, such as switch.table and

On Aug 25, 2014, at 8:26 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 August 2014 19:32, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >> Is there a way to distinguish between GlobalValues that are user-defined and >> those that are compiler-defined? I am looking for a function that I can use >> to tell if a GlobalValue is user-defined ,

>> The literalN sections were developed long ago to support coalescing of >> unnamed constants like 9.897 in source code for architectures that could not >> embed large constants in instructions. The linker could knew how to break >> up the section (e.g. __literal8 is always 8 byte chunks) and coalesce copies >> by content. >> >> ~6 years ago we

>> Agreed. If ld64 can drop support for .o produced by the old gcc that >> would be awesome. Failing that, what is really needed is > Because of static archives, the linker has to support old .o files for quite a while. I also don’t know when clang starting getting this right. r123585 (Jan 16 17:19:34 2011) I think. > Also, this seems like linker complexity for a very

Hi all, First post to the list, I hope you can help or guide me on this task. I am involved in a project that requires to re-link extracted and edited IR code Thus I want to know if these tools can be used in this way? clang++-4.0 code03.cpp -emit-llvm -S -o code03.ll llvm-extract-4.0 code03.ll -func main -S -o extracted_main.ll llvm-link-4.0 code03.ll -only-needed -override extracted_main.ll

Hi all, I was looking at the ValueMapper code this morning and I notice that it doesn't do type mapping for GlobalValues. Is this correct? I ask because I am seeing a case where I'm failing type assertions from ModuleLinker::linkGlobalInits() when an array initializer references an external global. It looks like the external global is being mapped directly and this causes an element

On 11/01/12 07:50 AM, Michael Muller wrote: > > Hi all, I was looking at the ValueMapper code this morning and I notice that > it doesn't do type mapping for GlobalValues. Is this correct? > > I ask because I am seeing a case where I'm failing type assertions from > ModuleLinker::linkGlobalInits() when an array initializer references an > external global. It looks

Hi, could anybody explain what GlobalValue::AvailableExternallyLinkage means? I implemented an instrumentation pass that creates a clone of a function. For some programs I noticed that also function such as “atoi”, “atof”, “__strspn_c2”, etc. they get cloned even if I am not implementing them in the module. I would like to avoid cloning those functions, so I noticed that they have

> -----Original Message----- > From: Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 4:04 PM > To: Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com> > Cc: Leonard Chan <leonardchan at google.com>; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC][LLVM] New Constant type for > representing function PLT entries > > On Fri, Aug

When I attempt to follow any tutorial for llvm and add the `llvm-config --cxxflags --ldflags --libs all` line to my GXX_FLAGS, g++ chokes on llvm/GlobalValue.h, complaining of an invalid cast from int to llvm::GlobalValue::LinkageTypes. I receive this error under both Red Hat and Ubuntu and the version of G++ I am using is 4.1.2. Thanks in advance, Jared -------------- next part -------------- An

Thanks Mehdi. My pass clones the functions within a module in order to have the original function and an exact copy of the same function but with a different name, i.e. sum() and sum_parallel(). After my pass I will run ThreadSanitizer instrumentation pass only on the new copy of the functions, i.e. only the “_parallel” functions will be instrumented by tsan. In some programs that I am

Because what is happening is that if function “atoi” gets cloned I don’t have a definition of “atoi_parallel” therefore I get undefined references when linking. I just want to clone and instrument functions implemented in modules of my program. > On Nov 19, 2016, at 13:54, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Nov 19, 2016, at 12:44 PM, Simone Atzeni

> > On Nov 19, 2016, at 14:09, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > I assume from your description that you are also updating call sites in the same module so that if foo was calling atoi, after cloning you have foo_parallel that is calling atoi_parallel? > If this is the issue, it depends, I’d probably consider turning the available_externally into internal.

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at pcc.me.uk>> wrote: > The specific change I have in mind is to allow !range metadata on GlobalObjects. This would > be similar to existing !range metadata, but it would apply to the

Hi, I am trying to update the initializer of a global value and I have encounter two issues: The first one is that I can not change the type of the global value. Let say that I have the following variable: @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [6 x i8] c”Test0A\00", align 1 How can I change the ”Test0A\00” to ”OtherTest0A\00”. Is this possible? I know that you can change the initializer

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Steven Wu via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Feb 8, 2018, at 10:28 AM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2018-02-08 9:33 GMT-08:00 Steven Wu <stevenwu at apple.com>: > >> >> >> On Feb 7, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: >>

Hello, I found a function call Function::isDeclaration() in llvm 2.5 (I know that's ancient...), which is useful to me, but I can't find it in the later version 3.3, nor the latest 3.7.....Therefore, is there an alternative way to check whether the function is just a declaration or a definition ? PS: I read the source code of llvm 2.5, and found isDeclaration is simply to check if the

r261464 added a type called ConstantData to the Value hierarchy. This is a parent type for constants with no operands, such as i32 0 and null. Since then, I've removed most instances of iterating through the use-lists of an instance of ConstantData. I'd like to make this illegal. Since the users of ConstantData are spread across an LLVMContext, most code that looks at the users is

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Fangrui > Song via llvm-dev > Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 10:18 PM > To: Leonard Chan <leonardchan at google.com> > Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC][LLVM] New Constant type for > representing function PLT

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rafael_=C1vila_de_Esp=EDndola?= wrote: > > I can reproduce this consistently, but only under an extremely large pile of > > code :-) I haven't tried to strip it down to minimal a test case yet, but I > > will. One salient difference with the code you've provided is that in my > > code, @a is a struct type. However, changing the example to use a