similar to: [LLVMdev] Create a call to function malloc using LLVM API

Hi all, consider the following function from Core.cpp in LLVM 9.0.0: LLVMValueRef LLVMBuildMalloc(LLVMBuilderRef B, LLVMTypeRef Ty, const char *Name) { Type* ITy = Type::getInt32Ty(unwrap(B)->GetInsertBlock()->getContext()); Constant* AllocSize = ConstantExpr::getSizeOf(unwrap(Ty)); AllocSize = ConstantExpr::getTruncOrBitCast(AllocSize, ITy);

Thanks for your reply. I'm attempting to expand KLEE to support this intrinsic function. That's why I need to handle this myself. According to the reply, the correct implementation should first find the definition of the object and then determine the size of the object. BTW, can I just refer to the implementation in InstCombineCalls.cpp. On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Matt Arsenault

The documentation of LLVM says that "The llvm.objectsize intrinsic is lowered to a constant representing the size of the object concerned". I'm attempting to lower this intrinsic function to a constant in a pass. Below is the code snippet that I wrote: for (BasicBlock::iterator i = b.begin(), ie = b.end(); (i != ie) && (block_split == false);) { IntrinsicInst *ii =

>> On Sun, 27 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >>>> I just checked in a new LLVMBuilder class into >>>> llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h, >>> It does not seem to be on the LLVM cvsweb, is that still showing 1.9 or >>> 2.0 >>> and not cvs ? >> >> It is there: >>

Hi all, I was playing around with LLVM 7 and I discovered something that seems to me to be a bug -- or at least something that I don't understand. Take the following valid simple program and run -instcombine on it declare i8* @malloc(i64) define void @caller() { entry: call void @callee() ret void } define fastcc void @callee() { entry: %malloccall = call i8* @malloc(i64 9) store

Suppose I have a small dataframe > aa Target Eaten ID 50 TPP 0 1 51 TPP 1 2 52 TPP 3 3 53 TPP 1 4 54 TPP 2 5 50.1 GPA 9 1 51.1 GPA 11 2 52.1 GPA 8 3 53.1 GPA 8 4 54.1 GPA 10 5 And I want to reshape it into ID TPP GPA 1 1 0 9 2 2 1 11 3 3 3 8 4 4 1 8 5 5 2 10 I realise that

From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> Some firmware implementations may need ExitBootServices to be called twice. The second time with an updated memory map key. Signed-off-by: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> --- efi/main.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 05:54:04 +0200 celelibi--- via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > > Some firmware implementations may need ExitBootServices to be called > twice. The second time with an updated memory map key. > > Signed-off-by: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > --- > efi/main.c |

Hello, I'm running wine-1.1.2 on Ubuntu 8.04.1 with JACKD 0.109.2. I'm trying to run TPP, a small application that makes it possible to run Winamp DSP plugins without using Winamp. It takes the input from one sound device, does some processing on it and outputs it to another sound device. When i try to run this in Wine (with JACK), i get a popup that says: WaveInGetPosition: This

2015-11-02 12:34 UTC+01:00, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com>: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:54 PM, celelibi--- via Syslinux > <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >> From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> >> >> Some firmware implementations may need ExitBootServices to be called >> twice. The second time with an updated memory map key. >>

Hey Everyone, I know that LLVM subscribes to the notion of "progress over backwards compatibility." And in that spirit, maybe someone could help me better understand the motivation behind removing the MallocInst? Is there a design doc anywhere? From a pragmatic sense, the IRBuilder's createMalloc, which was returning a MallocInst, was doing a lot of messy work for

2015-11-03 11:24 UTC+01:00, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com>: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Celelibi <celelibi at gmail.com> wrote: >> 2015-11-02 12:34 UTC+01:00, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com>: >>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:54 PM, celelibi--- via Syslinux >>> <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >>>> From: Sylvain Gault

On Sep 7, 2010, at 8:03 AM, F van der Meeren wrote: > Hello, > > I have a question, what is wrong with the following code? > > declare void @llvm.memcpy.p0i64.p0i64.i8(i64*, i64*, i8, i32, i1) nounwind > > ... > > call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i64.p0i64.i8(i64* %19, i64* %21, i8 %17, i32 0, i1 false) > > ... > > > According to the compiler this is the

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:54 PM, celelibi--- via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > > Some firmware implementations may need ExitBootServices to be called > twice. The second time with an updated memory map key. > > Signed-off-by: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > --- > efi/main.c | 75

The man page for getline says: ssize_t getline(char **lineptr, size_t *n, FILE *stream); [...] If *lineptr is set to NULL and *n is set 0 before the call, then get‐ line() will allocate a buffer for storing the line. This buffer should be freed by the user program even if getline() failed. which seems to indicate that we must initialize both line and len to 0 before the first

This adds two extra tests using QMP (the QEMU Monitor Protocol). This allows us to get extra information about the qemu binary beyond what is available from the version number or ‘qemu -help’. --- lib/qemu.c | 177 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 175 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/qemu.c b/lib/qemu.c index bdd9947a8..34775041f 100644

Hi all, I added support for the allocsize function attribute to our compiler (LDC), thinking that that would enable removal of function calls when the allocated memory is not used. For example: ``` declare i8* @my_malloc(i32) allocsize(0) define void @test_malloc() { %1 = call i8* @my_malloc(i32 100) ret void } ``` I thought the my_alloc call in test_malloc would be removed, but `opt -O3`

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Celelibi <celelibi at gmail.com> wrote: > 2015-11-02 12:34 UTC+01:00, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com>: >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:54 PM, celelibi--- via Syslinux >> <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >>> From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> >>> >>> Some firmware implementations may need

RS/6000 machine AIX V.4.2 OS SAMBA 1.9.18p4 AIX/NT4.0 -win95 WSs Problem: We cannot seem to browse our NT 4.0 server, or any of our shared WS's, resources, etc... remotely. Locally, everything works great. I have run through all 10 tests, with positive results. Below is a copy of our SMB.CONF file: *************************************************

Hello, I have a question, what is wrong with the following code? declare void @llvm.memcpy.p0i64.p0i64.i8(i64*, i64*, i8, i32, i1) nounwind ... call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i64.p0i64.i8(i64* %19, i64* %21, i8 %17, i32 0, i1 false) ... According to the compiler this is the error, but I seem to miss where exactly my fault is. Intrinsic prototype has incorrect number of arguments! void (i64*,