search for: addexpr

Hi Nick, Thanks for looking into it. I have tried that as well but it didn't worked. "AddExpr->getOperand(0))" node is: " (4 * (sext i32 {2,+,2}<%for.body4> to i64))<nsw>" When I cast this to "SCEVAddRecExpr" it returns NULL. Regards, Ashutosh -----Original Message----- From: Nick Lewycky [mailto:nicholas at mxc.ca] Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015...

...las at mxc.ca] Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 1:02 PM To: Nema, Ashutosh Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Cast to SCEVAddRecExpr Nema, Ashutosh wrote: > Hi Nick, > > Thanks for looking into it. > > I have tried that as well but it didn't worked. > > "AddExpr->getOperand(0))" node is: > " (4 * (sext i32 {2,+,2}<%for.body4> to i64))<nsw>" > > When I cast this to "SCEVAddRecExpr" it returns NULL. Oh. Yeah, that's because it's a multiply with a 4 on the left. On the right is an sext, and if you gr...

Hi, I'm trying to cast one of the SCEV node to "SCEVAddRecExpr". Every time cast return NULL, and I'm unable to do this. SCEV Node: ((4 * (sext i32 {2,+,2}<%for.body4> to i64))<nsw> + %var)<nsw> Casting: const SCEVAddRecExpr *AR = dyn_cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SCEVNode); 'var' is of type float pointer (float*). Without 'sext' it works, but

...identifies an expression as "SCEVAddRecExpr". Aren't the expressions below the kind of pattern that should be represented as a "AddRecExpr" ? SCEV: (1 + (2 * %3) or SCEV: (%1 + (2 * %3) or SCEV: (%1 + (%2 * %3) In my experiments they are always recognized as just "AddExpr" (not *Rec*). Can someone help me on this? What I'm misunderstanding here? I'm using the attached code to perform my experiments and this example as test input: int main() {     int vet1[100], i=0;     for (i=0; i<10; i++) {         vet1[3*i + 2] = vet1[i];     }     return 0;...

...Alignment(4); auto Target = OutContext.createLinkerPrivateTempSymbol(); // Use a two-byte `jmp`. This version of JMP takes an 8-bit relative offset as // an operand (computed as an offset from the jmp instruction). OutStreamer->EmitInstruction( MCInstBuilder(X86::JMP_1) .addExpr(MCSymbolRefExpr::create(Target, OutContext)), getSubtargetInfo()); EmitNops(*OutStreamer, 9, Subtarget->is64Bit(), getSubtargetInfo()); OutStreamer->EmitLabel(Target); Which turns into: .Lxray_sled_0: .palign 2, 0x90 jmp .Ltmp0 nopw 512(%rax,%rax,1) .Ltmp0: // rest of the...

...dd1411, i64 %add > store i64 0, i64* %arrayidx24, align 8 > {{{(5 + ((3 + %n) * %n)),+,(2 * %n * %n)}<%for.cond1.preheader>,+,(4 * %n)}<%for.cond4.preheader>,+,6}<%for.cond7.preheader> This expression is not straight forward because llvm always fold the loop invariant in the AddExpr into the AddRecExpr. If I understand the AddRecExpr correctly, the above SCEV is equivalent to: (5 + ((3 + %n) * %n)) + (2 * %n * %n) * {0,+,1}<%for.cond1.preheader> + (4 * %n) * {0,+,1}<%for.cond4.preheader> + 6 * {0,+,1}<%for.cond7.preheader> In the above example, you can treat...

...globals-aa by default. -1% 7. r248638: [SCEV] Reapply 'Teach isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond to exploit trip counts'. +2% 8. r249802: [SCEV] Call `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` after `GroupByComplexity`; NFCI. +4% 9. r250157: [GlobalsAA] Turn GlobalsAA on again by default. +1% 10. r251049: [SCEV] Mark AddExprs as nsw or nuw if legal. +23% 11. No data 12. r259252: AttributeSetImpl: Summarize existing function attributes in a bitset. -1% r259256: Add LoopSimplifyCFG pass. -2% 13. r262250: Enable LoopLoadElimination by default. +3% 14. r262839: Revert "Enable LoopLoadElimination by default"....

...java:1213) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.memberExpr (Parser.java:1204) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.unaryExpr (Parser.java:1115) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.mulExpr(Parser.java: 1062) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.addExpr(Parser.java: 1045) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.shiftExpr (Parser.java:1032) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.relExpr(Parser.java: 1015) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.eqExpr(Parser.java: 1002) [canoo] at org.mozilla.javascript.P...

...PM > To: Nema, Ashutosh > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Cast to SCEVAddRecExpr > > Nema, Ashutosh wrote: >> Hi Nick, >> >> Thanks for looking into it. >> >> I have tried that as well but it didn't worked. >> >> "AddExpr->getOperand(0))" node is: >> " (4 * (sext i32 {2,+,2}<%for.body4> to i64))<nsw>" >> >> When I cast this to "SCEVAddRecExpr" it returns NULL. > > Oh. Yeah, that's because it's a multiply with a 4 on the left. On the > right...

...7. r248638: [SCEV] Reapply 'Teach isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond to exploit trip counts'. +2% >> 8. r249802: [SCEV] Call `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` after `GroupByComplexity`; NFCI. +4% >> 9. r250157: [GlobalsAA] Turn GlobalsAA on again by default. +1% >> 10. r251049: [SCEV] Mark AddExprs as nsw or nuw if legal. +23% >> 11. No data >> 12. r259252: AttributeSetImpl: Summarize existing function attributes in a bitset. -1% >> r259256: Add LoopSimplifyCFG pass. -2% >> 13. r262250: Enable LoopLoadElimination by default. +3% >> 14. r262839: Revert "...

...SCEV] Reapply 'Teach isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond to exploit > trip counts'. +2% > > 8. r249802: [SCEV] Call `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` after > `GroupByComplexity`; NFCI. +4% > > 9. r250157: [GlobalsAA] Turn GlobalsAA on again by default. +1% > > 10. r251049: [SCEV] Mark AddExprs as nsw or nuw if legal. +23% > > 11. No data > > 12. r259252: AttributeSetImpl: Summarize existing function attributes in > a bitset. -1% > > r259256: Add LoopSimplifyCFG pass. -2% > > 13. r262250: Enable LoopLoadElimination by default. +3% > > 14. r262839: Reve...

Is there any chance of replacing/extending the GEP instruction? As noted in the GEP FAQ, GEPs don't support variable-length arrays; when the front ends have to support VLAs, they linearize the subscript expressions, throwing away information. The FAQ suggests that folks interested in writing an analysis that understands array indices (I'm thinking of dependence analysis) should be

...ge.html#address-spaces) With upstream compiler, the testcase fails with a crash (given at the end of the e-mail) in the opt while trying to generate the RT check for these pointers. Precisely, with two pointers of different address spaces. The operand type check fails while trying to insert a 'AddExpr' SCEV node as their effective type differs for these pointers (One with 32-bit and the other with 64-bit) Question: Is this intended to try for the RtCheck on pointers from different address spaces? The comments given in the code snippet (below) hints they aren't. Code...

Dear Mr. Northover, Thank you for the quick reply. You are correct about the address-mode operands :) . I guess an important detail left out was that the basic block (call it A) that wants to calculate the address of the target stationary trampoline basic block (call it B) will be moved around in memory during run-time. Our earlier solution, before the feature was implemented to move around (A)

...OI6A%3D&reserved=0>) With upstream compiler, the testcase fails with a crash (given at the end of the e-mail) in the opt while trying to generate the RT check for these pointers. Precisely, with two pointers of different address spaces. The operand type check fails while trying to insert a ‘AddExpr’ SCEV node as their effective type differs for these pointers (One with 32-bit and the other with 64-bit) Question: Is this intended to try for the RtCheck on pointers from different address spaces? The comments given in the code snippet (below) hints they aren’t. Code snippet...

...id, I probably would not have written my e-mail), but applying it only to the 'address computation' itself. On the other hand, maybe that violates SCEV's general philosophy of being control-flow independent (maybe the logic that prohibits us from applying an add's nsw flag to an SCEVAddExpr should prohibit this as well). > > As an aside, you could still prove no-self-wrap for this recurrence. > If the base of the GEP is an NW recurrence (note that NSW or NUW > implies NW), the GEP itself is inbounds, and the GEP simplifies to a > recurrences, then I think you can infe...