[levelraise] Calling verifyFunction implicitly requires dominator information!

[llvmbot]

Bugzilla Link	169
Resolution	FIXED
Resolved on	Feb 22, 2010 12:45
Version	trunk
OS	All
Reporter	LLVM Bugzilla Contributor

Extended Description

Regression/Transforms/LevelRaise/2002-07-31-AssertionFailure.ll is failing on the Mac,
when DominatorSet tries to pull in ImmediateDominators, as a result of running the Verifier:

#​3 0x0041df74 in llvm::ImmediateDominators& llvm::Pass::getAnalysis<llvm::
ImmediateDominators>() const (this=0xbfffeea0) at /Users/brg/llvm/include/llvm/Pass.h:165
165 assert(Resolver && "Pass has not been inserted into a PassManager object!");
(gdb) up
#​4 0x0009f078 in llvm::DominatorSet::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) (this=0xbfffeea0,
F=@0x4e02360) at Dominators.cpp:264
264 ImmediateDominators &ID = getAnalysis();
#​5 0x000b5618 in llvm::verifyFunction(llvm::Function const&) (f=@0x4e02360) at Verifier.cpp:594

[llvmbot]

assigned to @lattner

[lattner]

Again, we are probably going to have to add an INLCUDEFILE stub thing to
Dominators.h to pull in Dominators.cpp... Do all of these problems just point
out how bad the standard gnu linker is?

-Chris

[llvmbot]

Note: I am also getting this on zion. I am guessing that it's because
verifyFunction calls the Dominators stuff without putting it in a
PassManager, and ImmediateDominators as you recently rewrote it isn't
set up to handle this case. I would appreciate it if you would take a
look at this, even if only to tell me how wrong I am :-)

[lattner]

Ok, I'll fix this one tommorow.

Thanks Brian!

-Chris

[lattner]

This bug was fixed with this patch:
http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20031208/010090.html

[lattner]

This bug did not exist in 1.0.