similar to: Link Struct to Metadata

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 6:52 AM <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Xin > > Tong via llvm-dev > > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 9:33 PM > > To: llvm-dev > > Subject: [llvm-dev] ThinLTO Bug ? > > > > Hi > > > > I

Hi I have encountered a module verification failure when running 2 files with thin-lto (I hit this bug in the link step in LTO on a really large program and I reduced to this test case). ~/llvmfb/build-debug/bin/llvm-lto2 run -o c a.o b.o -r a.o,c,px -r b.o,a,px -r b.o,b,px -r a.o,gv -r b.o,gv Called function is not the same type as the call! %2 = call i1 bitcast (i1 (%struct.TA*)* @b to i1

After to speaking to Devang and a number of other people at the developer's conference, I was able to make some forward progress on getting debugging to work. I'm now able to actually single-step through my program and set breakpoints, and examine function parameters. However, I'm also seeing a lot of new problems which weren't exposed before. After spending the better part of two

> On 2014-Nov-10, at 08:30, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Nov 9, 2014, at 5:02 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >> In response to my recent commits (e.g., [1]) that changed API from >> `MDNode` to `Value`, Eric had a really interesting idea [2] -- split >> metadata entirely from the `Value` hierarchy, and

On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Talin wrote: > After to speaking to Devang and a number of other people at the developer's conference, I was able to make some forward progress on getting debugging to work. I'm now able to actually single-step through my program and set breakpoints, and examine function parameters. > > However, I'm also seeing a lot of new problems which

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Talin wrote: > > After to speaking to Devang and a number of other people at the developer's > conference, I was able to make some forward progress on getting debugging to > work. I'm now able to actually single-step through my program and set > breakpoints,

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Tim > Northover via llvm-dev > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 3:07 AM > To: Nat! > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] A question to the DWARF experts on symbol > indirection > > Hi Nat!, > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 at 01:21, Nat! via

I have no objections to any of this FWIW :) -eric On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:46 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > On 2016-Mar-22, at 20:11, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:04 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> +pcc, who had some other

> On 2016-Mar-22, at 20:11, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:04 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> +pcc, who had some other ideas/patch out for improving memory usage of debug info >> +Reid, who's responsible for the windows/CodeView/PDB debug info which is motivating some of the ideas about

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:04 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > +pcc, who had some other ideas/patch out for improving memory usage of > debug info > +Reid, who's responsible for the windows/CodeView/PDB debug info which is > motivating some of the ideas about changes to type emission > > So I discussed this with Adrian and Mehdi at the social last

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > On 2016-Apr-15, at 10:27, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < > dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > Since I haven't heard any objections to the direction,

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > Since I haven't heard any objections to the direction, I'm planning to > commit this (step 4) when I find some cycles; likely over the weekend. > > To make this more concrete (in case someone is silently concerned) I've > posted my WIP patches below. They apply cleanly to

On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Talin wrote: > >> After to speaking to Devang and a number of other people at the developer's conference, I was able to make some forward progress on getting debugging to work. I'm now

Hi, I see things like this. What does it mean? Is it documented somewhere? Thanks. ; preds = %for.body https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html ; <label>:91: ; preds = %88 %92 = load i8**, i8*** @glob_complete_word.matches, align 8, !dbg !99798 %93 = load i32, i32* @glob_complete_word.ind, align 4, !dbg !99799 %94 = sext i32 %93 to i64, !dbg !99798

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > On 2016-Apr-15, at 14:53, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < > dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> > >> > On 2016-Apr-15, at 10:27, David

Dear all, Hi! Recently, I notice a situation where I cannot infer the size of the outermost dimension of array in the function interface. To concretely depict the problem, I show the C source code and the generated IR code at the end. The array size of A[] is 51 but this information is lost in the generated IR. How can I maintain such information in IR? Should I set some argument for

Dear David, Thanks for your prompt reply! Sure, I can implement a AST visitor to go through the AST to get the information but I just wonder whether there is any other way to let Clang do so. What I am considering is how to let the generated IR looks like below, which some tools realize: define dso_local i32 @_Z1fPii([51 x i32]* %A, i32 %x) local_unnamed_addr #0 !dbg !7 { entry: ...

> On Apr 1, 2020, at 2:56 AM, Sourabh Singh Tomar <sourav0311 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Do you mean documenting the desired frontend behavior, or adding some verifier in > LLVM? A warning for the latter is that SROA may currently emit IR that contains a > mix of declares and values for different fragments of an aggregate variable, so I > assume that is something that

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Devang Patel < <dpatel at apple.com> > dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Talin wrote: >> >> After to speaking to Devang

Yes, Reid. I have used these methods to figure out the layout. Now my question is to build a map between the original layout and the new layout. I show one example below. When LLVM IR access the 4th (starting from 0th) member (i32) of the class A, the map will tell that in fact it is accessing the originally 3rd member (i1). Any suggestion? Regards, Hu Hong On 29 December 2016 at 10:50, Reid