search for: cphaensch

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Carl-Philip Hänsch <cphaensch at googlemail.com> wrote: > While trying to find a solution for this bug > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11235 , > I came to the conclusion that the following things can happen while > optimizing: >  - after gvn, I get new constants which are inserted into br and > add/s...

...=arm or -march=x86-32 I've got following error message from clang: error: unknown target CPU 'arm' or error: unknown target CPU 'x86-32' Is there a way to build clang so that it support cross-compilation for ARM/x86-32 ? Best Regards Seb 2011/10/27 Carl-Philip Hänsch <cphaensch at googlemail.com> > You can compile an empty C source code with clang -S -emit-llvm and copy > the data layout from there. > > 2011/10/27 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > >> Hi all, >> >> Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of ta...

While trying to find a solution for this bug http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11235 , I came to the conclusion that the following things can happen while optimizing: - after gvn, I get new constants which are inserted into br and add/sum/..., so there should be at least one more jump-threading and/or instsimplify - after instsimplify, I get new constants which are inserted into br, so there

If you run with -vectorize instead of -bb-vectorize it will schedule the cleanup passes for you. -Hal Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid -----Original message----- From: "Carl-Philip Hänsch" <cphaensch at googlemail.com> To: Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Sent: Tue, Feb 14, 2012 16:10:28 GMT+00:00 Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Vectorization: Next Steps I tested the "restricted" keyword and it works well :) The generated code is a bunch of shufflevector in...

...advance, .r. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/attachments/20120214/06679ec8/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:51:57 +0100 From: Carl-Philip H?nsch <cphaensch at googlemail.com> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Vectorization: Next Steps To: Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Message-ID: <CAO_gjAVJBcN==XwfJBJ6UL+=pPxjRkPXHoLNuOBQDVQjUciD0A at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" That works...

You can compile an empty C source code with clang -S -emit-llvm and copy the data layout from there. 2011/10/27 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > Hi all, > > Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of target > datalayout for an ARM cortex-A9 + neon target and x86 32-bit ? > Shall I use a different definition for a cortex-A9 without neon ? > Thanks for

Hi all, Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of target datalayout for an ARM cortex-A9 + neon target and x86 32-bit ? Shall I use a different definition for a cortex-A9 without neon ? Thanks for your advices Best Regards Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> > If you run with -vectorize instead of -bb-vectorize it will schedule the > cleanup passes for you. > > -Hal > > *Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid* > > > -----Original message----- > > *From: *"Carl-Philip Hänsch" <cphaensch at googlemail.com>* > To: *Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>* > Cc: *llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu* > Sent: *Tue, Feb 14, 2012 16:10:28 GMT+00:00 > * > Subject: *Re: [LLVMdev] Vectorization: Next Steps > > I tested the "restricted" keyword and it works well :) > &g...

Hi, i have the following code: define internal %"struct.dexter::ConditionConstant"* @_ZN6dexter18BinaryConditionAdd8evaluateEv5(%"class.dexter::BinaryConditionAdd"*) { entry: %1 = getelementptr inbounds %"class.dexter::BinaryConditionAdd"* %0, i32 0, i32 0, i32 1 %2 = load %"class.dexter::BaseCondition"** %1, align 8 %3 = bitcast

I tested the "restricted" keyword and it works well :) The generated code is a bunch of shufflevector instructions, but after a second -O3 pass, everything looks fine. This problem is described in my ML post "passes propose passes" and occurs here again. LLVM has so much great passes, but they cannot start again when the code was somewhat simplified :( Maybe that's one

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 11:11 +0100, Carl-Philip Hänsch wrote: > I will test your suggestion, but I designed the test case to load the > memory directly into <4 x float> registers. So there is absolutely no > permutation and other swizzle or move operations. Maybe the heuristic > should not only count the depth but also the surrounding load/store > operations. I've attached

Hi, the following llvm-ir is manipulated by the optimizers: %target2 = getelementptr %.string %result, i32 0, i32 3, i32 %len1 (%_.string = type {i32, i32, i32, [0 x i8]}) the last parameter i32 %len1 is replaced by i32 0 by the optimizers. (both, 2.9 and 2.8). When i turn optmization off, it works correctly. How can i use an optimizer-safe dynamic indexing of arrays? -------------- next part

Hello, I have attached an example file to show you how i'm doing string concatenation. (This is the result after opt -O3 from llvm3.0) There are two strings (a and b) allocated and filled with malloc and llvm.memcpy (from an internal constant). Then, a third string (c) is created. The new length is correctly constant folded, and llvm.memcpy copies the memory from the first two strings into

Hello, I have to use the target data layout for my compiler to make the native linker work. But the target data layout is target specific. My bitcode file should not be. The only critical thing in the layout is the pointer size: "p:32:32" vs "p:64:64". Is there a way to use placeholders to insert the bit width of a pointer at a very late stage? It would be uncool when the

I don't have a solution for you, but when you found one or start the project on your own, let me know. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111002/f54dd8de/attachment.html>

If you need hints what you could optimize, ask me. I have a whole bunch of cases where LLVM does not generate the best code. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111013/996c515c/attachment.html>

Not yet. But i asked on the mailing list and I asked around in the IRC channel. 2011/10/13 Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com> > > On Oct 13, 2011, at 10:20 AM, Carl-Philip Hänsch wrote: > > > If you need hints what you could optimize, ask me. I have a whole bunch > of cases where LLVM does not generate the best code. > > Have you filed bugs? > > -eric

Here I will introduce my idea of a inliner that can handle splitting cold edge as well: My idea is to use the inlined function, but inline from the uninlined function. 1. Do normal optimizations without inlining 2. Split the cold edges into other functions 3. Copy each function @xyz to @xyz.i (or other name that does not clash) and mark @xyz with 'inlines @xyz.i' ==> this needs an

Hello LLVM list, I am writing a JIT compiler for a SQL in-memory database and I have an issue: I want to compile specialized functions per-object which replace a virtual function call. What I want to achieve is to feed memory from runtime into the code. I know the runtime value behind some values (especially the 'this' pointer) and want llvm to profit from that additional knowledge for

Hi, I'm about designing the compiler backend of my script language and I have generic types in the language. An example is the array. An array#int means array of integers. You can compare it to Java's generics. Whenever i have a variable of the type "generic", the type should be replaced by the really used type. Now the question is: how do i represent them in llvm without losing