similar to: [LLVMdev] "LLVM as a library" and signaling failures other than crashing

Dear LLVM, I'm trying to understand why the attached IR code works for x86_64 target and fails for nvptx64, because of unimplemented expand during the target lowering. Any ideas? Just change the target triple to x86_64-unknown-unknown, and the same IR code could we successfully codegen-ed for x86_64. Thanks, - Dima. dmikushin at dmikushin-desktop:~/Desktop$ gdb ~/sandbox/bin/llc GNU gdb

Ok, I'll submit a patch to turn that into a report_fatal_error saying you can't start an abbrev with an array or blob. Thanks, Filipe F On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > The restriction looks reasonable: A record starts with a code. The code > can be encoded as a literal or be part of the abbreviation. > >

> what does "refuses to compile" mean? I.e. what error do you get? > Specifically I get this message when compiling with the default -mattr: Call result #2 has unhandled type i32 UNREACHABLE executed at CallingConvLower.cpp:162! 0 llc 0x0000000100a1e115 PrintStackTrace(void*) + 38 1 llc 0x0000000100a1e6d0 SignalHandler(int) + 254 2

Hi Josef, > Okay, I've done a lot more testing and I now have a .bc file that compiles for x86, sparc, mips but refuses to compile for the mblaze and powerPC backends because of the calling convention. Is there anyone that would know how to fix the microblaze calling convention or point me in the right direction on how to fix it? what does "refuses to compile" mean? I.e. what

Dear colleagues, I'm looking if we can replace nvopencc with LLVM NVPTX in our project. It turns NVPTX won't work with the code nvopencc can handle (please see the log below). So are atomic intrinsics not supported or am I doing call in a wrong way? Thanks, - Dima. SOURCE ======== dmikushin at hp2:~> cat kernelgen_monitor.ll ; ModuleID =

Hello, it looks like I do have infinite loop in llc on linux/armv7 platform somewhere in llvm::SmallVectorImpl. Two backtraces obtained with 10 seconds delay are: 0x0099be14 in llvm::SmallVectorTemplateCommon<llvm::SDNode*>::setEnd (this=0x7ee90b38, P=0x5c06988) at /export/home/karel/vcs/llvm-head/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:103 103 void setEnd(T *P) { this->EndX = P; }

I have a problem where I add an Andersens AA pass to the pass manager, but it appears to get invalidated by another pass, and never rerun. My understanding from reading the documentation is that when a pass gets invalidated, it should be rerun before any other passes that requires it. Here is a simple example of the problem I am seeing: PassManager passManager; passManager.add(new

Hi Michael, hi Duncan, yesterday I stumbled over something that might be related. At least I could also just be doing some initialization wrong or something in this direction... In my case, I hit a segfault in PassInfo::isAnalysisGroup() after PassManager.add(myModulePass) is called. My setup seems fairly simple, the attached code should reproduce the error. Compile with g++ test.cpp

Ok, well, I seem to have pinpointed the cause of the problem more accurately. I'm running some optimization passes on my module after I compile each function in my scripting language (functions can be compiled at various times, when scripts are loaded). Now it seems these optimization passes will prune some of the native C++ functions I'm registering in my module (the functions that

Your constructor is not calling initializeTestMPPass(), and you're using RegisterPass which I think was deprecated in favor of INITIALIZE_PASS. You can look at, for example, lib/Transforms/Scalar/IndVarSimplify.cpp for examples of how to initialize, e.g. having "INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LoopInfo)" sandwiched between BEGIN and END. Note that you'll want a forward declaration of

When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will segfault. What's odd is that if I rearrange this (add required for DominatorTree before LoopInfo), it does not segfault. I realize that LoopInfo requires and preserves DominatorTree, but this

Hi Michael, > When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault > where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and > DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will > segfault. I suggest you build LLVM with assertions enabled - then you should get a helpful error message rather than a segfault. I think you are not allowed to

Nyx wrote: > Ok, well, I seem to have pinpointed the cause of the problem more accurately. > I'm running some optimization passes on my module after I compile each > function in my scripting language (functions can be compiled at various > times, when scripts are loaded). Now it seems these optimization passes will > prune some of the native C++ functions I'm registering in

Thanks for the response. I do have assertions enabled, and none of them are getting hit. I did do a search of the mailing list for the past year (approximately) before writing my email, and what I found was that you should be allowed to use LoopInfo and other analysis function passes from a module pass, with the only difference being that getAnalysis is passed the function. The example code I

I find a bug in document llvm/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#debughints Since the PassManager class is in the namespace llvm, we should use command (gdb) break llvm::PassManager::run to set breakpoint. Otherwise we get error message: (gdb) break PassManager::run Can't find member of namespace, class, struct, or union named "PassManager::run" Hint: try

Hi, I am working on a backend for a CGRA architecture with advanced predicate support (as on EPIC machines and as first used in the OpenIMPACT compiler). Until last month, the backend was working fine, but since the r161643 commit by stoklund, my backend doesn't work anymore. I think I noticed some related commits later on, and the assertion I get on the latest trunk (r164162) differs from

Julien Schmitt wrote: > Hi ! > In my quest of implementing my own AA, i understood that it doesn't work > because i don't use the 'opt' tool but i create my own PassManager (this > for other reasons). > The problem is the same with other existing AA (AndersensPass or > globalModRefPass) : > these AApasses are not chained with the basicAA when they are

The linkage type is set to external, I have little code snippet I use to register those native functions in the first post of this topic. The global DCE pass deletes the unused native functions when run. I commented it out for now... Nick Lewycky wrote: > > Nyx wrote: >> Ok, well, I seem to have pinpointed the cause of the problem more >> accurately. >> I'm running

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 21 March 2016 at 17:34, Tim Northover via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> My understanding is that clang and llvm themselves are designed this way > >> (crash when the unexpected happens). > > > > I don't think so. I'd view any

Hi All, I am planning to re-implement PassManager in llvm 2.0. The goal is to address http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/Inliner-PassManager.txt and http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/LoopOptimizerNotes.txt and other crazy ideas Chris has. Current implementation of PassManager is very complex. Initially I attempted to update it to address above notes but realized that redoing