llvm dev - Sep 2008 - [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli

Evan,
My overall goal is to support dynamic optimization in LLVM.  In order to do so,
I must gather profiling information at runtime, then recompile the profiled
functions. Currently, I'm just adding and removing calls into my profiler in
a custom pass.  What is the advantage of giving the JIT a second profile manager
over my current implementation? Thanks.
Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Evan Cheng" <evan.cheng at apple.com>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 12:46:16 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli

Hi Tom,

I don't think this is the right approach. May I ask you what passes  
you are trying to add? If you just want to run a number of llvm level  
optimization passes, the right approach is to add your own pass  
manager instead.

Evan

On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Thomas B. Jablin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in specifying some additional passes to the JIT via  
> the command-line. The enclosed patch allows lli to take compiler  
> passes as command-line arguments in the same way opt does. This is  
> my first submission, so any comments, criticisms, or observations  
> would be very welcome. Thanks.
>
> Tom  
> Jablin 
> < 
> PassArgumentsForLLI 
> .diff>_______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Sep 15, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Thomas B. Jablin wrote:
> Evan,
> My overall goal is to support dynamic optimization in LLVM.  In  
> order to do so, I must gather profiling information at runtime, then  
> recompile the profiled functions. Currently, I'm just adding and  
> removing calls into my profiler in a custom pass.  What is the  
> advantage of giving the JIT a second profile manager over my current  
> implementation? Thanks.
> Tom
It's just a cleaner design. There are well defined pass manager,  
executionengine, and JIT api's. We don't want to unnecessarily extend  
them. JITState PM controls the codegen passes. If you want to add LLVM  
level optimization passes, you can simple use a separate PM to run them.

Evan
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Evan Cheng" <evan.cheng at apple.com>
> To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 12:46:16 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada  
> Eastern
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> I don't think this is the right approach. May I ask you what passes
> you are trying to add? If you just want to run a number of llvm level
> optimization passes, the right approach is to add your own pass
> manager instead.
>
> Evan
>
> On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Thomas B. Jablin wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm interested in specifying some additional passes to the JIT via
>> the command-line. The enclosed patch allows lli to take compiler
>> passes as command-line arguments in the same way opt does. This is
>> my first submission, so any comments, criticisms, or observations
>> would be very welcome. Thanks.
>>
>> Tom
>> Jablin
>> <
>> PassArgumentsForLLI
>> .diff>_______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev