similar to: How to split module into several ones

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

Hi all, Is it planned to add support of rotations to IR? Thanks, Aleksey Zasenko -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151119/c897b935/attachment.html>

Hi llvm-community, I use llc (3.4-final) to generate object file: *llc code.bc -mtriple=x86_64-pc-win32-elf -mcpu=x86-64 -filetype=obj -code-model=large -o=code.o* then I load it with *RuntimeDyld + SectionMemoryManager* in my app. I faced the problem described in 15356 <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15356>bug. Debug assertion fails at

I would think that the R_X86_64_PC32 relocation type should never be generated with large code model since large code model, by definition, makes no assumptions about the size or address of sections. The use of win32-elf might throw a wrinkle into this, since that is a code path that probably isn't exercised much outside of MCJIT use. That said, when this assertion fails it is usually

Hi all, Need your help. I added some debug information to my code according to Kaleidoscope-9 sample and got stuck with a GDB error: (gdb) info functions > invalid dwarf2 offset 1849950870 > My module is a DLL built with llc+ld toolchain. Target triple: 'i686-w64-mingw32'. Looking this offset (1849950870 == 0x6e440296) in dwarfdump output of the dll gave the following:

Hi all, In my MSVC-compiled project I am using MCJIT to run some generated code. I faced that in case of Win64 ('x86_64-pc-win32-elf') __try/__except block doesn't work - the stack can not be unwound. I have found that the only way to fix it is implementing my own *registerEHFrames* function of the Memory Manager (but I'm not sure this helps). Maybe someone had a success solving

Hi, I am wondering if anyone could run ArrayBoundChecks located in SafeCode-llvm37 (https://github.com/jtcriswell/safecode-llvm37) on llvm-3.8? Thanks. Syed -- Rafi

I hope this is the correct avenue to contact the poolalloc developers. I'm trying to use an alias analysis from the poolalloc repository and can't get it to compile with the latest LLVM. CMake is now required for LLVM, I'm pretty sure at least, but poolalloc does not seem to use it correctly. The README in the project refers to the old Makefiles. I corrected a minor CMake error and a

Hi all, Consider the following example: define void @fn(i8* %buf) #0 { entry: %arrayidx = getelementptr i8* %buf, i64 18 tail call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* %arrayidx, i8* %buf, i64 18, i32 1, i1 false) %arrayidx1 = getelementptr i8* %buf, i64 18 store i8 1, i8* %arrayidx1, align 1 tail call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* %buf, i8* %arrayidx, i64 18, i32 1, i1 false)

Hi, I'm trying to get the pool allocator and safe code building against llvm trunk. I've run into a build error, and I see that in the past another user was told just not to build the pool allocator for use with safecode [1]. However, I really want the pool allocator transforms, so I just wanted to check why the suggestion was not to use it. Has it been superseded in some way by something

Hello, I am Abhinav Tripathi, B.Tech 3rd Year student from IIT Indore, India. I was looking on the projects ideas page of llvm and saw that I could also propose to work on the SAFECode Open projects. As I found no mailing list on their site, I am sending this message here. Please redirect me to some other list, if required. . I found most of the projects quite alluring as I have been working on a

Hello, I am trying to apply DSA (from the poolalloc project - I'm on LLVM 3.2) on the following C program and found that the generated callgraph over-approximates the callees for the simple indirect call. #include <stdio.h> __attribute__((noinline)) static int f1(int arg1, int arg2) { return arg1 + arg2; } __attribute__((noinline)) static int run_func(int (*fptr)(int, int), int

Hi I see when LLVM builds the CallGraph SCCs. a function calling through a function pointer is conservatively assumed to call internal and external functions. Therefore, it has an edges pointing to the externalnode2, ie. the externalnode representing outgoing calls from this module. does LLVM have any function pointer analysis capabilities in the mainline ? Thanks, -Trent

Hi Simon, > From: Simone Atzeni <simone.at at gmail.com> > To: John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Walking thru CallGraph bottom up > Message-ID: <318EBA41-2040-4EFE-B330-5813C817C2A2 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > I think I got it and the example is

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.

Dear Community, The ponyc<https://github.com/CausalityLtd/ponyc/tree/llvm37> (llvm37 branch) project is facing an issue on Windows: When optimizations are turned on (llvm 3.7.0-final and more specifically<https://github.com/CausalityLtd/ponyc/blob/llvm37/src/libponyc/codegen/genopt.cc>, opt-level 3, BBVectorize, LoopVectorize, SLPVectorize, RerollLoops, LoadCombine + a custom heap

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

Since we are only a week away from branching for 3.7.0, this new breakage in the stage2 bootstrap of llvm/clang/compiler-rt/clang-tools-extra should get triaged. At r241513, a three stage bootstrap with comparision of stage2/stage3 files completed fine. However at r241594 we now have the new regression reported in https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24054... Assertion failed: (Val &&

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

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