similar to: Preventing function call from being optimized out in LTO

Hi David, By "dead" do you mean unreachable? My understanding was that the removal of dead code is simply another optimization, which should be disabled after adding "optnone" (and adding the function to llvm.used so the function doesn't later get deleted entirely). I am instrumenting certain basic blocks in an LLVM pass, and would like to compile a binary which

Hi David, Sure! Here's a function in sqlite3 called verifyDbFile, compiled with -O3. This is what it looks like when the intermediate bitcode is emitted by clang: link <https://pastebin.com/L3PrK1ac> And here's what happens after I run opt -O3 (no additional command-line arguments) on the file containing this function: link <https://pastebin.com/rZHBm2iU>. I'm not 100%

Hi, I have tried to build libjpeg-turbo <https://github.com/libjpeg-turbo/libjpeg-turbo> with LTO in LLVM, using both clangbut get many errors in lld that look like the following: ld: error: undefined symbol: jpeg_std_error >>> referenced by jcstest.c:76 >>> lto.tmp:(main) ld: error: undefined symbol: jpeg_CreateCompress >>> referenced by

Adding a couple of lld folks. I helped Shishir debug this, the link line looked like: /home/sjessu/build/bin/clang -O0 -flto -o jcstest jcstest.o ./.libs/libjpeg.a and the issue was that libjpeg.a was created with the system ar instead of llvm-ar. It worked when recreating libjpeg.a with llvm-ar. I noticed that the lld code has some special handling for the case when there is a missing

Hello, I am adding to an LLVM pass that requires a filename as input. I am able to input this filename as a command line argument when I invoke this pass using opt, but I ultimately need to pass this argument to my code when I compile code with clang. How can I pass this argument to clang so that I can use it in my LLVM pass? Thanks for your help! Best, Shishir Jessu -------------- next part

Hi, I am looking into Control-Flow Integrity for indirect function calls, implemented with jump tables. I want to step through the code that produces these jump tables in GDB. I have built clang and opt from source with debugging symbols. I believe this code lives in llvm/lib/Transforms/LowerTypeTests.cpp, but when I try to debug *opt* by running the command "run -lowertypetests cfi-icall.bc

Hello, I am compiling a program with debugging information, and am attempting to extract !dbg numbers from function calls in LLVM IR. However, I've found a few inconsistencies. For example, this call exists in my module: %1 = tail call i1 @llvm.type.test(i8* bitcast (i32 (i32)* @_Z5otheri to i8*), metadata !"_ZTSFiiE") #5, *!dbg !69*, !nosanitize !2 I would like to extract the 69

I agree that the ArrayRef is likely the issue. I've debugged a crash caused by a temporary ArrayRef like that a couple times. Either do what David suggested or use a normal array: Metadata *mdArray[] = {ConstantInt::get(Int64Ty, 0), newMD}; ~Craig On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:56 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at

Hi, I have made some changes in the LowerTypeTests Pass of opt, and would like to use these changes with the clang version I have downloaded. I compiled clang and llvm from scratch, made my changes in LowerTypeTests.cpp, and recompiled clang and opt. When I run clang with the appropriate flags to invoke the pass, it invokes the pass as originally written, but when I run opt on the relevant

Hello, I am editing the LowerTypeTests pass in LLVM, and part of my additions include the following 3 lines of code: // newTypeName is a std::string MDString* newMD = MDString::get(M.getContext(), newTypeName); ArrayRef<Metadata*> mdArray {ConstantInt::get(Int64Ty, 0), newMD}; auto* node = MDTuple::get(M.getContext(), mdArray); Thus far, I have been developing on a version of Clang with

Hi all, I’ve been working on a Java-esque object-oriented language Bolt that targets LLVM IR. I’m agonisingly close to getting a virtual table working, and was hoping one of you could point out the gap in my understanding. I’ve linked the C++ code snippets relevant to the vtable below. Example IR generated (partially displayed below):

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, I'm Ryo Ota. I'm using LLVM 3.8.1. I have a quesion about inlining function in C++ API. I'd like to inline some functions in a module in the same way as `opt -inline` command. But my C++ code didn't work what I want to do. For example, by using `opt -inline` command,`main.ll` is converted into the `inlined.ll`(`opt` command worked what I want to do) [main.ll (Not inlined)]

Hey guys, Whys are there like 5 variants of CreateCall in IRBuilder<> with numbers appended to them? The only difference I can see is the number of arguments. Aren't C++ function overloads be suited for this? Félix

Hi, I'm trying to add function calls in the LLVM IR using the IRBuilder class. I've read both tutorials about functions but I still get assertion errors. I allocate memory for all function arguments and pass them as explained in the tutorial. My code is (this function is supposed to add a call to f in bb at pos): void addCallSite(Function *f, BasicBlock *bb, BasicBlock::iterator pos)

That seems to work, thanks! The specific code I ended up with to call int64_t print(int64_t) looks like: auto f = builder.CreateIntToPtr( ConstantInt::get(builder.getInt64Ty(), uintptr_t(print)), PointerType::getUnqual(FunctionType::get( builder.getInt64Ty(), {builder.getInt64Ty()}, false))); return builder.CreateCall(f, args); On Mon, Mar

I did M.getOrInsertFunction and called the exit function with . IRBuilder<> builder = IRBuilder<>(...); Value *one = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt32Ty(M.getContext()),1); builder.CreateCall(exitF,one,"tmp4"); "Instruction has a name, but provides a void value! %tmp4 = call void @exit(i32 1) Broken module found, compilation aborted! " On Thu, Mar 31,

I notice that there's a lot of inconsistency in the various LLVM classes with respect to convenience methods. Here's some examples: For creating GEPS, IRBuilder has: CreateGEP (2 overloads) CreateInBoundsGEP (2 overloads) CreateConstGEP1_32 CreateConstInBoundsGEP1_32 CreateConstGEP2_32 CreateConstInBoundsGEP2_32 CreateConstGEP1_64 CreateConstInBoundsGEP1_64

On 11 June 2017 at 12:05, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 June 2017 at 11:56, Dipanjan Das via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I can't pass var_value to a function accepting uint64_t. LLVM complains > > about broken function call. > > Well, yes. var_value has type "ConstantInt *", not uint64_t. Assuming

I guess currently we do not have these arithmetic with overflow variants in IRBuilder . So CreateCall is the only way to do it. Is it a good idea to add them into the IRBuilder? even thought they are in turn implemented with CreateCall only? - sanjiv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: