similar to: Intrinsic opt failure

On 2/16/2016 8:44 AM, Konstantin Vladimirov via llvm-dev wrote: > > CI->getArgOperand(0) returns operand with type (double*) rather then > double, because in our ABI doubles are passed via memory. The LLVM intrinsics in the LLVM IR must conform to whatever the IR's requirements are. That means that even in the case of your backend, the arguments to the intrinsic must be doubles,

Some doxygen annotations are attached to the wrong entry, which can be misleading. This patch fixes the mistake everywhere I could find it. --- include/llvm/InstrTypes.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- include/llvm/MC/MCDirectives.h | 42 +++++++++++++++--------------- include/llvm/Pass.h | 10 +++--- 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-) diff

Hello LLVM-Dev, Most of the processing for i64 and f64 types for our backend are emulation library calls. Some of the library calls are not defined in the RuntimeLibcalls.def Libcall enum so we have to define custom library calls. How is the ideal way of implementing the custom library calls? Providing us with a target backend having a similar functionality would also help us significantly. Say

Thanks a lot! I finally fix my problem. My code is like this: //CallInst* pCall pCall is a printf called in my situation if( ConstantExpr * pCE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>( pCall->getArgOperand(0))){ if( GlobalVariable * pGV = dyn_cast<GlobalVariable>( pCE->getOperand(0))){ if( ConstantArray * pCA = dyn_cast<ConstantArray>(

I'm working on the code to handle GC tracing of "intermediate values" (as described in the GC doc), and I've run into a weird problem. (Note, this has nothing to do with the patch I have proposed, this error occurs with regular old pointer-allocas.) The exception I am getting occurs in this code here in SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp: *case* *Intrinsic*::gcroot: *if* (GFI) {

On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 04:28:13PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > It doesn't work for me at first since in my llvm there's only > llvm.bpf.load.*. > > I think llvm.bpf.store.* belone to some patches you haven't posted yet? nope. only loads have special instructions ld_abs/ld_ind which are represented by these intrinsics. stores, so far, are done via single

Hi Thomson, the new call to puts() is inserted right away, whereas the old call to printf() is removed a bit later in SimplifyLibCalls::runOnFunction(). If you browse the code a bit and backtrack the call stack to see what happens with the return value of PrintFOpt::OptimizeFixedFormatString(), you will stumble upon this segment in SimplifyLibCalls.cpp:1703ff.: // Try to optimize this call.

Hi Talin, I think that the framework for GC assumes llvm.gcroot to be in the first block. If it is not the case in your example, it will break these assumptions. Nicolas On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm working on the code to handle GC tracing of "intermediate values" (as > described in the GC doc), and I've run into a

songlh at cs.wisc.edu wrote: > Hi everyone: > > The code I am analyzing is : > > int main() > { > int i = 0; > printf("hello world!"); > printf( "%d" , i ); > } > > > > I want to get each place where printf is called, and the argument used > during that call. > > so I write llvm

I'm trying to track down the problem with the assertion failure in SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp. This is the code: *case* *Intrinsic*::gcroot: *if* (GFI) { *const* Value *Alloca = I.getArgOperand(0); *const* Constant *TypeMap = cast<Constant>(I.getArgOperand(1)); * FrameIndexSDNode *FI = cast<FrameIndexSDNode>(getValue(Alloca).getNode());*

Ignore the suggested fix in my earlier post. How about this? diff --git a/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp b/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp index 20c81c3..b8ebf42 100644 --- a/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp +++ b/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp @@ -1632,10 +1632,11 @@ X86TargetLowering::X86TargetLowering(const X86TargetMachine &TM, if (!Subtarget.is64Bit()) { // These

Hi Duncan, Thanks for pointing out my mistake. I will reword my questions. //C code int var1; //global int a, b; foo(a, b); bar(c); generates following //LLVM IR %1 = load a; %2 = load b; call foo(%1, %2) call bar(@var1) CallInst.getOperand(1).getNameStr() on foo, returns null, but on bar returns var1. Similarly, for call void @p_ptr(i64 ptrtoint (%struct.my_struct* @abc to i64)) nounwind,

I actually need this feature quite badly in my untyped language compiler: since I support first-class functions, I've made the types of all functions a standard vararg (so I can box them). The implementation crashes when I try to read out the value of gc.result. Hints as to what might be wrong? Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com> ---

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 =

Hey guys, I've come across a bug when combining an AND of FCMPs. This bug occurs in my compiler as well as Clang built from trunk. A reduced test case is: int foo( float a, double b ) { return (a == a) & (b == b); } and the error is: Assertion failed: (getOperand(0)->getType() == getOperand(1)->getType() && "Both operands to FCmp instruction are not of the same

Hi, This is really basic block level pass. It is no difference what is level, problem is the same. After fixing for asm parser, assembler syntax is no more valid for backend, without processing with asm parser. May be it will be solution to process inline asm on insn printer level to remove syntax fixes. But just switch it off without lto will make compiler do less job P.S. sorry for dup,

Hi, Imagine that your backend has valid asm instruction written like this: "%x mnem %y, %z" And user puts it as inline assembler: __asm__ ("%x mnem %y, %z"); It can not be parsed with current llvm asm parser, because it starts with % (moreover it has mnemonic in second place) Say you written pass, that makes it "mnem %x, %y, %z". Now this guy can be parsed, but

Hi all, I would like my optimization pass to change an object's address space that is created by llvm.lifetime.start intrinsic. Because I want to be able to identify them later in a codegen pass. I can get a pointer from the intrinsic using CallInst::getArgOperand() function. However, I don't know what to do with it (or if it is the pointer that I want). How can I change its address space?

Thank you Ahmad, I figured out that, although the type of both p(oInst) and p(nInst) were the same, I had to: for (unsigned int i = 0; i < callOInst->getNumArgOperands(); i++) { callOInst->getArgOperand(i)->mutateType(callNInst->getArgOperand(i)->getType()); } that solves the issue at the calling instruction in the main function, but now I see that *linkModules* does not work

Hello, my target has libcall support for long long shifts. I already have the following lines in my Lowering constructor: setLibcallName(RTLIB::SHL_I64, "__llshl"); setLibcallName(RTLIB::SRL_I64, "__llshru"); setLibcallName(RTLIB::SRA_I64, "__llshr"); and setOperationAction(ISD::SHL, MVT::i64, Expand); setOperationAction(ISD::SRA, MVT::i64,