simplify CFG Pass in llvm

Project Infrastructure LLVM Dev List Archives
1

I was trying to run the simplify CFG Pass in LLVM , and delete an unreachable basic block (“continuation” below ) after running one of my own IR transforms , but I keep getting the
error -

While deleting: i8* %g

Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: store i8 0, i8* %g

I am well aware of what that means, but isn’t the whole purpose of the “simplifyCFGPass” to delete the unreachable basic blocks for us ? Why must it then throw this error ? I would assume it should simply be able to manage all the use-def dependencies and delete the instructions in the unreachable “continuation” basic block below.

Following is the relevant IR

entry:
%a3 = alloca i32
store i32 %a, i32* %a3
%a4 = load i32, i32* %a3
%ifcond = icmp ne i32 %a4, 0
br i1 %ifcond, label %then, label %else

then: ; preds = %entry
%gclone1 = alloca i32
store i32 0, i32* %gclone1
ret i5 0

else: ; preds = %entry
%gclone4 = alloca i64
store i64 0, i64* %gclone4
ret i5 0

continuation: ; No predecessors!
%iftmp = phi i32 [ 32, %then ], [ 64, %else ], !range !0
%datasize = alloca i32
store i32 %iftmp, i32* %datasize

%g = alloca i8 ---------------------> Issue
store i8 0, i8* %g ---------------------> Issue
ret i5 0
}

Can someone please explain why this error crops up ? Isn’t the API supposed to handle this ?

Thanks,
Malhar

2
  1. If you’re going to send a testcase to llvmdev, please make sure it is complete: if it isn’t possible to reproduce the issue, we’re going to be left guessing what the issue is. 2. Running the verifier can catch a lot of issues (llvm::verifyModule in the C++ API). If your IR doesn’t follow the rules correctly, you can get weird results. 3. It’s generally a bad idea to put “alloca” instructions anywhere other than the entry block of a function, if you can avoid it; see .
3

Hi Friedman ,

I did not put the whole IR because it would be context sensitive.

I am trying to use non-concrete types in my language but trying to
first generate the IR using dummy types and then transform the IR

to contain the correct types.

hence,I am forced to use the allocas in the middle ,

again because of the problem above that I am trying to solve.

Thanks,

Malhar