similar to: Is extern_weak a legal linkage for function definitions?

These warnings started appearing recently when building LLVM: llvm[2]: Compiling LLParser.cpp for Release build /Volumes/Data/Users/kremenek/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function ‘bool llvm::LLParser::ParseBr(llvm::Instruction*&, llvm::LLParser::PerFunctionState&)’: /Volumes/Data/Users/kremenek/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp:3195: warning: ‘Op1’ may be used uninitialized in

Hello! I see the following build failure of the sources at the top of the trunk, on x86_64. make[2]: Entering directory `<llvm-root>/build/llvm/lib/AsmParser' llvm[2]: Compiling LLLexer.cpp for Release build llvm[2]: Compiling LLParser.cpp for Release build <llvm-root>/src/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function 'bool llvm::LLParser::ParseGlobal(const

On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 10:39:46PM -0800, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: > cvs -d <CVS Repository> co -r release_19 llvm I'm getting a build error: llvm[2]: Compiling llvmAsmParser.cpp for Release build /rest/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/llvmAsmParser.y: In function `int llvmAsmparse()': /rest/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/llvmAsmParser.y:2105: error: expected `;' before '}' token

The language reference states that local temporaries begin with index 0, but if I try that on my not-entirely-up-to-date v3.4 llc (it is like a week old), I get an error "instruction expected to be numbered '%1'". Also, quite a few examples in the LR uses %0 as a local identifier. Should I fix those or is it a problem in llc? -- Mikael -------------- next part --------------

Hi, I was building LLVM with gcc 6.1.1 recently and it was spitting out some warnings relating to misleading indention that caught my eye. This wasn't a fresh build so I may have missed some. I've CC'ed the authors of the potentially misleading lines so they can decide what do about the warnings (if anything). I'm wondering if clang-format is making some inappropriate choices

Thanks for the lecture :) But I was not planning on changing a single line in LLVM/Clang. I stick to the documentation until I've learned to swim, perhaps even forever. Ah, now I see. You thought I meant "should I modify the code to do this or that." I only meant to change the documentation. Please refer to the patch I've sent on LLVM-commits. That's about what I had

There is a description of all the possible linkage types at http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#linkage – does this answer your question? (Basically, an extern_weak resp. ExternalWeakLinkage symbol becomes null instead of being an undefined reference) David On 3/16/11 7:06 PM, Junjie Gu wrote: > What is the difference between WeakAnyLinkage and ExternalWeakLinkage > ? They are defined

Rafael, did you ever get a chance to look at this? -- Sean Silva On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < > rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> writes: >> >> When __libc_start_main is hidden, it

Hi, I'm wondering why lib/AsmParser/LLParser handles fast-math flags in the following IR: ... %val = fmul nnan double 1.0, 1.0 ... but doesn't allow any flags if "fmul" is inside "phi": ... %val = phi double [ fmul (double 1.0, double 1.0), %cond.true ], [ fmul (double 1.0, double 1.0), %cond.false ] ...

2 new warnings in llvm: /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function 'bool llvm::LLParser::ParseGlobal(const std::string&, const char*, unsigned int, bool, unsigned int)': /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp:446: warning: 'IsConstant' may be used uninitialized in this function

A new warning: /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function 'bool llvm::LLParser::ParseGlobal(const std::string&, const char*, unsigned int, bool, unsigned int)': /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp:448: warning: 'IsConstant' may be used uninitialized in this function

Hi Alex, We've only recently managed to get the core scalable vector IR type into the codebase (so it will be present in 9.0); that allows you to write IR with scalable vector types, but there's no backend able to generate code for it yet, and as you mention no support for stepvector (or vscale). Arm will start upstreaming those soon. -Graham > On 13 Jul 2019, at 14:32, Alex Susu via

Hello Tim, Thank you for getting back to me. The language grammar as defined by the LLVM Language Reference Manual [1] does not include the details of the LLVM IR parser reference implementation. The following extract from "lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp" illustrates that unnamed globals are allowed [2]. > /// ParseUnnamedGlobal: > /// OptionalVisibility (ALIAS | IFUNC) ...

I had a phone conversation yesterday with Graham, Francesco, and Kristof. There is one more reason to go with the native type change: ARM has already written the code with the SV types, and they have patches ready to be reviewed and integrated in LLVM. As I don't want to stand in the way of getting SVE in LLVM as soon as possible, I will also support the integration of the existing patches

(gah, this turned into a huge digression, sorry) The implicit numbering of BB's seems to be a pretty frequent issue for people. Surprisingly, the issue boils down to simply changing the IR asm (.ll file) syntax so that it can have "unnamed BB's" in a recognizable way that fits in with how unnamed values work (the asmprinter makes an effort to print a comment with the BB number,

Hello, It is likely that I missing something however I have to ask. We are working on Mull project https://github.com/mull-project which deals with LLVM IR in the first place so it is often that we encounter errors like the following one when we do things like parseAssemblyString(IR, Err, GlobalCtx);`: ``` test: <string>:7237:187: error: invalid field 'variable' !1526 = distinct

Hi Duncan, On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Ralf, > >> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >> BasicBlocks? > > not at the moment. Feel free to work on adding this functionality! I am looking into that now. I decided to temporarily go for the following syntax for BasicBlock metadata (subject to discussion): entry:

On 25 May 2016 at 16:10, Robin Eklind via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > declare void @foo() unnamed_addr > global i32 42 Doesn't a global have to be named? The syntax in the IR reference doesn't make it optional: @<GlobalVarName> = [Linkage] [Visibility] [DLLStorageClass] [ThreadLocal] ... Cheers. Tim.

Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> writes: >> When __libc_start_main is hidden, it doesn't end up in the dynamic symbol >> table and so we use the default DynsymIndex of 0. >> > > > I think BFD is doing the right thing. The `extern_weak hidden` is resolved > to null since by virtue of being hidden it doesn't refer to the function in > libc.so (and

Without ANY intent of offending anybody, I simply don't like C++. I did code in it for some 12 years back from 1990 to 2002, but then I left it behind with a feeling of happiness. The main reason I am _trying_ to make a new language is that I hope to one day come up with something that can help retiring C++. I love C# but that language is yet too slow for many demanding problem domains.