search for: createstandardltopasses

...asically a historical anachronism coming from > the way GCC used to work. Thanks for explaining. Why not redefine it from historical anachronism to architectural flag, that indicates you may generate more code with the same functions and globals later? And then, you could pass the same flag to createStandardLTOPasses, and that would skip the GlobalDCE passes. >> Even then, my runtime function prorotypes are still being stripped away by the GlobalDCE added by createStandardLTOPasses. > > Sure, and why not? Unused prototypes are not used for anything, they won't > turn up in the generated c...

...anachronism coming from >> the way GCC used to work. > > Thanks for explaining. > > Why not redefine it from historical anachronism to architectural flag, that indicates you may generate more code with the same functions and globals later? And then, you could pass the same flag to createStandardLTOPasses, and that would skip the GlobalDCE passes. LTO is for doing optimizations that are only valid when the module contains everything that is needed to build the final executable. So adding a flag to say "not everything is there after all" makes no sense to me. >>> Even then, my r...

Hi, I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and DisableInliner switches. Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in some other ways ? - Sanjiv

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Feb 9, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > > >> Hi, >> I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. >> Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and >> DisableInliner switches. >> >> Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in >> some other ways ? >> > > Why do you want this? > > -Chris > Mem2Reg isn't really useful for a si...

...es no sense to me. And indeed, everything is there when I call LTO. The flag is not "not everything is there after all", but "don't damage your inputs". > >>>> Even then, my runtime function prorotypes are still being stripped away by the GlobalDCE added by createStandardLTOPasses. >>> >>> Sure, and why not? Unused prototypes are not used for anything, they won't >>> turn up in the generated code for example. >> >> They are not used this time. But why can't I generate additional code in the same module after having run LTO? &...

On Feb 9, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > Hi, > I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. > Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and > DisableInliner switches. > > Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in > some other ways ? Why do you want this? -Chris

...I wanted to llvm-c and the > ocaml bindings for the soon to be released 2.7. Does anyone need any > other functions exposed before the code freeze on the 7th? > Hi Erick, Can you make the following functions available in llvm-c. createStandardFunctionPasses createStandardModulePasses createStandardLTOPasses Thanks in advance, George

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:53 AM, George Giorgidze <giorgidze at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Erick, > > Can you make the following functions available in llvm-c. > > createStandardFunctionPasses > createStandardModulePasses > createStandardLTOPasses > > Thanks in advance, George This is a little tricky, so I need some advice from the community. First off, I'm not sure where it's appropriate to put these. For llvm-c, most files live in a header named after the library that includes the functions, and we don't have a correspon...

I've pretty much finished exposing all I wanted to llvm-c and the ocaml bindings for the soon to be released 2.7. Does anyone need any other functions exposed before the code freeze on the 7th?

...e support functions. Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try again. Suggestion: what about a comment explaining what "UnitAtATime" means :-) Even then, my runtime function prorotypes are still being stripped away by the GlobalDCE added by createStandardLTOPasses. So my question is: what is the correct, officially recommended way to reference runtime functions so that global DCE won't get rid of them? Or am I supposed to re-create the corresponding Function instances for every translation? Thank you in advance for enlightening me Christophe

...er, llvm-gcc or clang works on one source file at a time, so it won't do your step 2) automatically for you. What you want is link time optimization. See http://llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html and http://llvm.org/docs/GoldPlugin.html If you add your pass in gold plugin by modifying createStandardLTOPasses() then I believe it will do what you intend to do. - Devang

...r> passManager( new llvm::PassManager ); if ( optimize ) { llvm::createStandardFunctionPasses( passManager.get(), 2 ); llvm::createStandardModulePasses( passManager.get(), 2, false, true, true, true, false, llvm::createFunctionInliningPass() ); llvm::createStandardLTOPasses( passManager.get(), true, true, false ); } passManager->run( *module ); - If I *don't* comment out the optimization passes (inside the if statement above) LLVM crashes with what appears to be a stack overflow; I've attached the stack trace below. - The code above is in th...

...ew llvm::PassManager ); >        if ( optimize ) >        { >          llvm::createStandardFunctionPasses( passManager.get(), 2 ); >          llvm::createStandardModulePasses( passManager.get(), 2, false, true, true, true, false, llvm::createFunctionInliningPass() ); >          llvm::createStandardLTOPasses( passManager.get(), true, true, false ); >        } >        passManager->run( *module ); > - If I *don't* comment out the optimization passes (inside the if statement above) LLVM crashes with what appears to be a stack overflow; I've attached the stack trace below. > - The c...

Hi all, we're working on compile-time instrumentation for ThreadSanitizer (a data race detector, see http://code.google.com/p/data-race-test and http://code.google.com/p/data-race-test/wiki/CompileTimeInstrumentation), which is implemented as an opt plugin that is ran for each client C/C++ module we compile. To build a binary consisting of several modules the following steps are performed:

...you are generating them, rather than first generating all functions and other globals and only then optimizing. It's basically a historical anachronism coming from the way GCC used to work. > Even then, my runtime function prorotypes are still being stripped away by the GlobalDCE added by createStandardLTOPasses. Sure, and why not? Unused prototypes are not used for anything, they won't turn up in the generated code for example. > So my question is: what is the correct, officially recommended way to reference runtime functions so that global DCE won't get rid of them? Or am I supposed to re-c...

Hi All, It seems that I can't force some passes to run in llvm-ld as what I can do with opt. $ ~/opt/bin/llvm-ld -reassociate llvm-ld: Unknown command line argument '-reassociate. Try: 'opt/bin/llvm-ld -help' llvm-ld definitely linked with scalaropts, and RegisterPass<ReassociatePass> is in the library. Running with these passes with opt definitely work, but it'll

On Feb 10, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Feb 9, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. >>> Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and >>> DisableInliner switches. >>> >>> Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in >>> some other ways ? >>> >> >> Why do you want this? >> >> -Chris >> &gt...

Thank you very much for your suggestions. That's very helpful. However, since I'm trying to compile several somewhat large projects, I assume generating bitcode for each single file and linking them together might be painful (I don't want to modify too much the project makefiles). So I hope my pass can be used just with simple compilation command like "llvm-gcc

...s result to see if any instruction prior to it is define statement, but I am not sure if there is already better way to do that. (2) another question I am using the gold-plugin to compile large applications, it works very well, then, I want to add a pass into include/llvm/Support/StandardPasses.h: createStandardLTOPasses, Since I want to add a new phase and disable some existing phase, is there any way to pass some flag to do that, now my complication model is: export PREFIX=/home/tianwei/llvm/llvm-gcc-bin/ export CC="$PREFIX/bin/llvm-gcc -use-gold-plugin" export CXX="$PREFIX/bin/llvm-g++ -use-gold...