search for: createtailcalleliminationpass

...://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17323). By investigating those Polly canonicalization passes (polly/lib/RegisterPasses.cpp):     PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass());     PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass());     PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass());     PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass());     PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass());     PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass());     PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass());     PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); We can see that some of them are also called in common cases (lib/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp:181)...

...17323). > > By investigating those Polly canonicalization passes (polly/lib/RegisterPasses.cpp): > PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); > PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > We can see that some of them are also called in common cases (lib/Transform...

Hi Tobias, At 2013-09-19 22:59:25,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/19/2013 04:46 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Hi Tobias, >> >> >> I am trying to move Polly later. >> >> >> LLVM provides some predefined ExtensionPointTy: >> EP_EarlyAsPossible, >> EP_ModuleOptimizerEarly, >>

Hi, createTailCallEliminationPass() is able to turn recursive functions into loops when the functions are written in tail recursive form. However, I'm unable to get it to convert mutually recursive functions to run without a growing stack. For example (in pseudo code)- define fact(n,result) if n < 2 then result else...

...gisterCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); // PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); //this is the most expensive canonicalization pass for flop benchmark PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); PM.add(polly::createCodePreparationPass()); } Results are shown on http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/46?ba...

...registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); //this is the most expensive canonicalization pass for flop benchmark PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); if (!SCEVCodegen) PM.add(polly::createIndVarSimplifyPass()); PM.add(polly::createCodePreparationPass()); } If...

...ead jumps. MPM.add(createCorrelatedValuePropagationPass()); // Propagate conditionals MPM.add(createCFGSimplificationPass()); // Merge & remove BBs MPM.add(createInstructionCombiningPass()); // Combine silly seq's MPM.add(createTailCallEliminationPass()); // Eliminate tail calls MPM.add(createCFGSimplificationPass()); // Merge & remove BBs MPM.add(createReassociatePass()); None of them seems to be a loop pass? So it seems to be at the start of the LNO. Also, I would like to avoid calling an extension point ...

...ptimal. TODO: Optimize the set of canonicalization passes. static void registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); if (!SCEVCodegen) PM.add(polly::createIndVarSimplifyPass()); PM.add(polly::createCodePreparationPass());...

Tobias Grosser wrote: > As said before, we could probably add it in between those two passes: > > MPM.add(createReassociatePass()); // Reassociate expressions > + addExtensionsToPM(EP_LoopOptimizerStart, MPM); > MPM.add(createLoopRotatePass()); // Rotate Loop As this is in the middle of other LNO passes, can you please rename s/EP_LoopOptimizerStart/EP_Polly_LNO/ or

...t of canonicalization passes. > static void registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { > PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); > PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > if (!SCEVCodegen) > PM.add(polly::createIndVarSimplifyPass()); > >...

...n passes. > >static void registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { > > PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > > > if (!SCEVCodegen) > > PM.add(polly::createInd...

...gisterCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); // PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); //this is the most expensive canonicalization pass for flop benchmark PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); PM.add(polly::createCodePreparationPass()); } Results are shown on http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/46?ba...

...dulePasses->add(createScalarReplAggregatesPass()); // Break up aggregate allocas + PerModulePasses->add(createInstructionCombiningPass()); // Combine silly seq's + PerModulePasses->add(createCondPropagationPass()); // Propagate conditionals + PerModulePasses->add(createTailCallEliminationPass()); // Eliminate tail calls + PerModulePasses->add(createCFGSimplificationPass()); // Merge & remove BBs + PerModulePasses->add(createReassociatePass()); // Reassociate expressions + PerModulePasses->add(createLICMPass()); // Hoist loop inv...

NOTE: My original post was MIME mangled. So I'm reposting it. Sorry for that. Hi, createTailCallEliminationPass() is able to turn recursive functions into loops when the functions are written in tail recursive form. However, I'm unable to get it to convert mutually recursive functions to run without a growing stack. For example (in pseudo code)- define fact(n,result) if n < 2 then result else...

Thanks Chris. That works. -Srikumar On 04 Aug 2008, at 12:12 PM, llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: >> Hi, >> >> createTailCallEliminationPass() is able to turn recursive >> functions into loops when the functions are written >> in tail recursive form. However, I'm unable to get it >> to convert mutually recursive functions to run without >> a growing stack. > > ... > >> doesn't get to run in...

...t; static void registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase &PM) { >>> PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); >>> PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); >>> >>> if (!SCEVCodegen) >>>...

...> static void registerCanonicalicationPasses(llvm::PassManagerBase > > &PM) { > > PM.add(llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createTailCallEliminationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createCFGSimplificationPass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createReassociatePass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createLoopRotatePass()); > > PM.add(llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()); > > > > if (!SCEVCodegen) > > PM.add(polly::cre...

On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: > > At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >> the case, the numbers are very good. Otherwise, 30% overhead seems still >> to be a little bit much. > I think

At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> >> I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. > >Interesting. > >>

...// Constant prop with SCCP + + MPM.add(createDeadStoreEliminationPass()); // Delete dead stores + MPM.add(createAggressiveDCEPass()); // Delete dead instructions + MPM.add(createFunctionAttrsPass()); // Set readonly/readnone attrs + + MPM.add(createTailCallEliminationPass()); // Eliminate tail calls + } + + // End of CallGraph SCC passes. + } + + if (EnableLightWeightIPO) { + MPM.add(createGlobalOptimizerPass()); // Optimize out global vars + MPM.add(createIPSCCPPass()); // IP SCCP + MPM.add(createDeadArgEliminationPass()); // De...