similar to: What can cause llc to throw an error for instruction numbering?

Hi Tim, Thank you for that. I was just trying to replicate the branch instruction under a new opcode, so I don’t think that returns a value. Plus the code I was testing out didn’t have a br or my newly added instruction but it still threw that error at me. Here’s the IR code I tested: ; ModuleID = ‘cc.c’ source_filename = “cc.c” target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128”

Hi Tim, Thank you for the quick response! so you'd probably check you're looking at a BranchInst and check BI->getSuccessor(0)->getName() (& 1 if it's conditional) I initially was printing out the result from getName() (I.getParent()->getName()) and it printed out nothing sadly. when parsing the instructions in SelectionDAGBuilder but it was only visiting instructions in

Hello, I’m trying to insert an instruction if a specific label name/string is encountered and would appreciate some guidance on where I should start. Basically when parsing going through this .ll file: ; Function Attrs: noinline nounwind optnone uwtable define i32 @main(i32, i8**) #0 { %3 = alloca i32, align 4 %4 = alloca i32, align 4 %5 = alloca i8**, align 8 %6 = alloca i32, align

Hello, I am trying to insert a .byte/.word in the beginning of a specific LLVM IR instruction when it prints out in assembly (the inserted ‘instruction' only appears in assembly, not in LLVM IR), and I am guessing the best way to do that is to insert it in SelectionDAG as it strips down some LLVM IR instructions when it’s lowered. Can I get some guidance on what function I should use to insert

I changed Module::setTargetTriple to return true/false when an invalid/valid triple is passed as parameter. The validation is made using the ADT/Triple.cpp Last I modified LLParser::ParseTargetDefinition() to check if the return of setTargetTriple warns about an invalid triple. John. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 8975.diff Type:

Hi César, > I changed Module::setTargetTriple to return true/false when an > invalid/valid triple is passed as parameter. target triples with unknown vendor and other fields occur all the time. That's fine as long as you don't need those fields. What I am saying is that a boolean value "valid" or "not valid" isn't very useful in my opinion. Ciao, Duncan.

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

I did a RelWithDebInfo + asserts build of LLVM just now and, when running "make check" under Valgrind, am seeing a lot of uses of uninitialized memory like the one below. Anyone know offhand what's likely to be the root cause? Unfortunately a Debug build doesn't give these errors. Thanks, John FAIL: LLVM :: Analysis/BasicAA/pr18573.ll (2093 of 18733)

+llvm-dev Can you give a bit of background on what you're trying to address here? After reading through the discussion and seeing that this is a best effort flag, I'm not sure that a function attribute is the best way to describe this. I'm open to being convinced it is, but I'd like to hear a bit more about the use case and get broader visibility on the proposal first.

Well, it looks like almost all of the problems go away when I build using trunk instead of 3.9. So, that was scary but I'm going to forget it ever happened. >8000 test cases failed under Valgrind!! John On 11/20/2016 03:03 AM, Sanjoy Das via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi John, > > This is probably somewhat of a stretch, but since the problem does not > happen with a Debug build,

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

Hi Tanya, I see the following warnings when building. I'm not sure how to fix any of them. The last one looks like it might be serious (seems like a job for Chris). llvm[1]: Compiling Path.cpp for Release build In file included from Path.cpp:270: Unix/Path.inc: In member function ‘bool llvm::sys::Path::eraseFromDisk(bool, std::string*) const’: Unix/Path.inc:661: warning: ignoring return

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 ] ...

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) ...

On Jan 16, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Talin wrote: > OK here's the patch for real this time :) > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > Here's a work in progress of the union patch. Note that the test > "union.ll" does not work, so you probably don't want to check this > in as is. However, I'd be interested in any

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

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.

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

OK here's a new version of the patch - and the unions.ll test actually passes :) On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Talin wrote: > > OK here's the patch for real this time :) >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: >> Here's a work