similar to: [LLVMdev] Walking thru CallGraph bottom up

Dear Simon, Kevin is correct; as far as I can tell, there is no method of getting the functions calling a given function. Instead, you have to start at the main() function and search for the function using a depth-first or breadth-first search. What may make sense is to build a new data structure that has nodes that point from callees to callers once and then use that for your queries.

Thanks John. I guess I will use a ModulePass, so when I am implementing the “runOnModule” function, do I have to loop through all the functions, for each functions all the BasicBlocks and for each BasicBlock all the instructions or given the Module I have to call the CallGraph directly? Is there an example out there? I can’t find anything. Thanks. Simone > On Feb 24, 2015, at 13:29, John

On 2/25/15 10:51 AM, Simone Atzeni wrote: > Thanks John. > > I guess I will use a ModulePass, so when I am implementing the “runOnModule” function, > do I have to loop through all the functions, for each functions all the BasicBlocks and for each BasicBlock all the instructions If you know the Instruction, you can get it's basic block using Instruction::getParent(), and then get

Hi all, I would like to create a Pass that given an IR instruction walks starting from that instruction up to the main function to identify all the functions call that have been made to call that instruction. Is it possible? What kind of Pass should I create? Thanks Best, Simone Simone Atzeni simone.at at gmail.com +1 (801) 696-8373

Hi Herbie, thanks for you answer and explanation. > > Also, if any of the functions are external, you are completely stuck (unless you put everything together with lld). I am indeed having a problem regarding external function. I my program is just one file everything work and I can access all the functions. However, if it has multiple files I have a lot of unresolved pointers to

Thanks John. Does this solve the problem of analysis availability though? If I still have to run the function analyses manually, I might as well keep rolling with the CallGraphSCCPass. (I probably should have mentioned that this is what I’m using right now.) Félix > Le 2015-05-19 à 10:12:32, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> a écrit : > > On 5/18/15 10:45 PM, Félix Cloutier

So I got very mixed results. With the CallGraphSCCPass, both `addRequired<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>` and `addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>` fail at runtime. The LLVM core has just two CallGraphSCCPasses and neither uses neither analyses, so it's hard to find a valid example. I transformed the pass into a ModulePass, using scc_iterator as shown in CGPassManager to process

> > On Nov 19, 2016, at 14:09, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > I assume from your description that you are also updating call sites in the same module so that if foo was calling atoi, after cloning you have foo_parallel that is calling atoi_parallel? > If this is the issue, it depends, I’d probably consider turning the available_externally into internal.

Hi all, Can anyone give me advice about an appropriate way for extracting number of functions from module recursively (starting from entry point). Actually it may be more than one entry point so all dependent functions and global values must be extracted. I've tried llvm-extract tool but it can't do work recursively. Maybe it would be good to write some Call Graph pass or something. Any

Yes, the latest version can be downloaded from here https://github.com/liuml07/giri . The LLVM instrumentation code is in TracingNoGiri.cpp<https://github.com/liuml07/giri/blob/master/lib/Giri/TracingNoGiri.cpp> file and runtime code in Tracing.cpp. You may need to delete other unnecessary instrumentation code which you don't need. Thanks, Swarup. ________________________________

I ran into a similar problem a while ago; see https://reviews.llvm.org/D30107 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D33515 .  You get the unusual stack trace because it's trying to call a destructor in shared library which was already unloaded. I thought we had fixed that, but maybe not?  Looking again, it looks like the patch got reverted and I didn't notice. -Eli On 5/14/2018 10:18 PM,

Because what is happening is that if function “atoi” gets cloned I don’t have a definition of “atoi_parallel” therefore I get undefined references when linking. I just want to clone and instrument functions implemented in modules of my program. > On Nov 19, 2016, at 13:54, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Nov 19, 2016, at 12:44 PM, Simone Atzeni

Hi, I am trying to compile LLVM for AARCH (VMA=42), here my cmake command: cmake -G "Ninja" -D SANITIZER_AARCH64_VMA=42 .. But I get the following warning: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CMake Warning: Manually-specified variables were not used by the project: SANITIZER_AARCH64_VMA

On 10/27/16 11:18 AM, Aliaksei Zasenka via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi all, > Can anyone give me advice about an appropriate way for extracting > number of functions from module recursively (starting from entry > point). Actually it may be more than one entry point so all dependent > functions and global values must be extracted. > > I've tried llvm-extract tool but it

Thanks so much John! That works :) Previously I wrote a pass that inherited from CallGraphWrapperPass and used its getCallGraph() function within runOnModule() which resulted in segmentation faults for me. Not sure why that happened, perhaps callgraph wasn't setup by the time runOnModule() was called internally. If you know why, kindly enlighten me and perhaps document the behavior for the

Thanks Mehdi. My pass clones the functions within a module in order to have the original function and an exact copy of the same function but with a different name, i.e. sum() and sum_parallel(). After my pass I will run ThreadSanitizer instrumentation pass only on the new copy of the functions, i.e. only the “_parallel” functions will be instrumented by tsan. In some programs that I am

It's working with trunk though. Do you think the patch will end up in 6.0.1? Thanks. Simone On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > I ran into a similar problem a while ago; see https://reviews.llvm.org/ > D30107 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D33515 . You get the unusual stack > trace because it's trying to call a destructor

Hi, as in the subject, is it possible to call on of the analysis pass present in the LLVM (lib/ folder) within a tool pass (tools/ folder)? Thanks. Best, Simone

Hi, not sure if this is the right place, but I am experiencing a problem using clang++ (3.9.1) with Boost Filesystem. I have this simple program: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ #include <iostream> #include <boost/filesystem.hpp> using namespace boost::filesystem; int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { if (argc < 2) { std::cout

Hello, I am trying to count IR instructions in a function for static analysis using llvm pass. In contrast with existing examples, I am trying to include instruction counts of all the callees of the function. Counting the instructions of a function is easy using passes, but iterating through the module's CallGraph is proving to be confusing. I believe I have to use CallGraphWrapperPass to