similar to: [RFC] Add DebugLoc parameter in Instruction’s Create() functions

Hi, I am new to LLVM infrastructure. Recently I am trying to set the debug info for an instruction. The main aim is to set the source line number of an instruction. Can anyone please show how to do that? I think that setMetadata method in Instruction class is to be used. But how do I create MDNode* consisting of desired source line number. Source line number can be extracted from the

Thanks for the help. I thought I'd solved the problem (setting the line number information in the instruction metadata) by inserting my own function for setting line number in llvm/Support/DebugLoc.h. I have added a function setLine(unsigned) in DebugLoc class. The function simply sets the LineCol variable as needed. But there is a problem. Whenever I'm checking the line number(calling

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Abhirup Ghosh <abhirupju at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, >       I am new to LLVM infrastructure. Recently I am trying to set the debug > info for an instruction. The main aim is to set the source line number of an > instruction. Can anyone please show how to do that? >       I think  that setMetadata method in Instruction class is to be used. >

Hi I want to insert some functions into the llvm bitcode ir files. So I use IRBuilder and CreateCall(). But it how error : inlinable function call in a function with debug info must have a !dbg location. I don't know what DebugLoc should I give the new CallInst to setDebugLoc. I Create this CallInst , so this CallInst doesn't hava so-called "DebugLoc" mapping to the source

Hi list, I found relevant documentation regarding DebugInfo creation in the LLVM IR bytecode. It can be done for compileunits, functions, and other constructs, with the help of DIBuilder class. However I can't save debug information related to individual llvm::Instructions. I tried DebugLoc, DILocation setting directly with setMetadata(). I tried other ways, for e.g.:

Hello everyone, is there any way to replace an instruction inside LLVM that is more elegant than creating a new one, replacing uses and deleting the old one if I only want to modify the type? It is generally not a big deal, but the issue gets really messy if I am in the middle of iterating over uses and start deleting some of them... I hope I could describe my problem well enough ;) Regards,

Oh! I made a mistake by not using setDebugInfo() function present in the Instruction class. Now it's working fully. So, the solution is:- To set the line number for an instruction - 1. Add a function in DebugLoc class located in llvm/Support/DebugLoc.h. Set the line number there to the private variable called LineCol. 2. Call the added function. And then pass the modified DebugLoc object to

Ralf Karrenberg wrote: > Hello everyone, > > is there any way to replace an instruction inside LLVM that is more > elegant than creating a new one, replacing uses and deleting the old one > if I only want to modify the type? It is generally not a big deal, but > the issue gets really messy if I am in the middle of iterating over uses > and start deleting some of them... >

Hi, Nick, thanks for the reply. I still have a problem: I only need to "clone" an Instruction, changing its type. That is, I would like to keep all characteristics of the old Instruction and create a new one only with a different type. I am trying create a new Instruction thus: %3 = add nsw i32 %1, %2 ; <i16> [#uses=2] //Old Instruction Value* Op0 = I->getOperand(0); Value*

Hello guys, I wonder how I can change the type of an integer variable. For instance, given the instruction "%3 = add i32 %1, %2" I would like to alter the instruction to "%3 = add i16 %1, %2". Is there any way to do this? Best wishes, Douglas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > On 01/24/2011 04:41 AM, Douglas do Couto Teixeira wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Nick, thanks for the reply. >> I still have a problem: I only need to "clone" an Instruction, changing >> its type. That is, I would like to keep all characteristics of the old >> Instruction

Hi All, I want to change debug information of an llvm instruction so that the modified debug info is subsequently passed to executable binary. So if I use "addr2line" utility on the binary, it will return my modified debug information. I've tried to change by using the following code snippet: MDNode *N = Inst->getMetadata("dbg"); DebugLoc Loc =

On 21 January 2011 12:56, Douglas do Couto Teixeira < douglasdocouto at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello guys, > > I wonder how I can change the type of an integer variable. For instance, > given the instruction "%3 = add i32 %1, %2" I would like to alter the > instruction to "%3 = add i16 %1, %2". Is there any way to do this? > No. Instead you create a new

On 01/24/2011 04:41 AM, Douglas do Couto Teixeira wrote: > Hi, > > Nick, thanks for the reply. > I still have a problem: I only need to "clone" an Instruction, changing > its type. That is, I would like to keep all characteristics of the old > Instruction and create a new one only with a different type. Sure, but what about its operands? An "add" instruction

> Every inlinable call in a function that has debug info (F->getSubprogram() returns non-null) must have a DebugLoc associated with it that has a scope chain that ends in that same DISubprogram. Thank you for the comment! I don't know if this is a proper way to fix, but after I add DebugLoc same as inserting position instruction, no error occurs.

Hi Eli, Mon Ping, > In ISO/IEC WG14 n1169 on the C extensions to support embedded > processors, any two address spaces must be disjoint, must be > equivalent, or must be nested. Ah, that standard is a lot clearer on this subject than the DSP-C one I read was. > As Eli indicated, the actual relationship is platform specific depending on > what makes the most sense for

Hi all, > If I read the standard correctly, the properties of these address spaces can > be fully captured by defining the relationship between every pair of address > spaces (disjoint, identical, subset/superset). > > I think it would make sense to make these relationships backend/platform > specific, but for clang and the optimization passes to properly work with > address

Every inlinable call in a function that has debug info (F->getSubprogram() returns non-null) must have a DebugLoc associated with it that has a scope chain that ends in that same DISubprogram. https://llvm.org/docs/SourceLevelDebugging.html discusses some of the debug info IR metadata in LLVM. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:03 AM Ku Nanashi via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

In ISO/IEC WG14 n1169 on the C extensions to support embedded processors, any two address spaces must be disjoint, must be equivalent, or must be nested. As Eli indicated, the actual relationship is platform specific depending on what makes the most sense for your hardware and how the program will behave will depend on that relationship. -- Mon Ping On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:25 AM, Eli

> On Nov 3, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Hui Zhang <wayne.huizhang at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I found a weird thing in llvm 3.3: > > For exactly the same MDNode *space, if I cast it to DILocation loc(space) and call loc.getFileName(), or I cast it to DIScope sco(space) and call sco.getFilename(), the return value would be different ! Totally two different files