search for: doinitialization

Hi all, Llvm can automatically group a list passes. I want to do some experiment to see the difference between grouping and non-grouping execution. Considering the following example, if I want to apply transformation A, B and C. The execution order is: A.doInitialization(); B.doInitialization(); C.doInitialization(); A.runOnFunction(); B.runOnFunction(); C.runOnFunction(); A.doInitialization(); B.doInitialization(); C.doInitialization(); Is it possible to disable the grouping? Make it execute as: A.doInitialization(); A.runOnFunction...

...> Llvm can automatically group a list passes. I want to do some >> experiment to see the difference between grouping and non-grouping >> execution. >> Considering the following example, if I want to apply transformation >> A, B and C. The execution order is: >> A.doInitialization(); >> B.doInitialization(); >> C.doInitialization(); >> A.runOnFunction(); >> B.runOnFunction(); >> C.runOnFunction(); >> A.doInitialization(); >> B.doInitialization(); >> C.doInitialization(); >> >> Is it possible...

...> Hi all, > > Llvm can automatically group a list passes. I want to do some > experiment to see the difference between grouping and non-grouping > execution. > Considering the following example, if I want to apply transformation > A, B and C. The execution order is: > A.doInitialization(); > B.doInitialization(); > C.doInitialization(); > A.runOnFunction(); > B.runOnFunction(); > C.runOnFunction(); > A.doInitialization(); > B.doInitialization(); > C.doInitialization(); > > Is it possible to disable the grouping? Make it...

Micah, As you expected, I am trying to create local memory but in the NVPTX backend. It's really not convenient that I can't create local memory in runOnMachineFunction. Hmm.... Since I should do it at doInitialization stage, I also need to do some tricks in global variable and AsmPrinter to resize it. Did you use the similar way? Antony 2013/8/5 Micah Villmow <micah.villmow at smachines.com> > Antony, > What are you trying to accomplish in this case? I did something very > similar in the AM...

I want to create share memory in my MachineFunctionPass, and insert load/store instruction for it. The way to create share memory is to add global variables which are in share memory address space (not sure if it is the only way). Therefore, I should add global variables in fixed size in doInitialization, and record its real size in other place like MachineModuleInfo. Then modify or query its real size from that place instead of size of variable. Antony 2013/8/6 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> > Can you tell us a bit more about what you're trying to accomplish?...

Hello, I want to add a global variable of arrayType in my MachineFunctionPass. However, I only get const Module from MachineFunction.getMMI().getModule(). I can't add any global variable to a const Module. Another way is to add a global variable in doInitialization in my MachineFunctionPass, but I can't determine the size of my arrayType for global variable in doInitialization. Is there any suggestion that can help me achieve this? Thanks in advance. Antony Yu -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Can-I-add-GlobalVariable...

...2f7b 9 llc 0x0000000000eb95e0 llvm::DwarfWriter::BeginModule(llvm::Module*, llvm::MachineModuleInfo*, llvm::raw_ostream&, llvm::AsmPrinter*, llvm::TargetAsmInfo const*) + 166 10 llc 0x0000000000b9b513 11 llc 0x0000000001142c73 llvm::FPPassManager::doInitialization(llvm::Module&) + 65 12 llc 0x0000000001142d96 llvm::FunctionPassManagerImpl::doInitialization(llvm::Module&) + 58 13 llc 0x0000000001142e01 llvm::FunctionPassManager::doInitialization() + 41 14 llc 0x000000000084b43d main + 2481 15 libc.so.6...

...gmail.com> wrote: > >> Micah, >> >> As you expected, I am trying to create local memory but in the NVPTX >> backend. It's really not convenient that I can't create local memory in >> runOnMachineFunction. >> Hmm.... >> Since I should do it at doInitialization stage, I also need to do some >> tricks in global variable and AsmPrinter to resize it. >> Did you use the similar way? >> >> Antony >> >> >> >> >> 2013/8/5 Micah Villmow <micah.villmow at smachines.com> >> >>> Antony, >&...

...t gmail.com> > Yes, global variables are the only way to access shared memory. > > I'm just trying to get an idea of what you're aiming to accomplish to see > if we can improve on the interface here. A MachineFunctionPass runs after > instruction selection and relying on doInitialization to run before > instruction selection is an implementation detail that I do not believe is > guaranteed anywhere (I could be wrong!). And modifying the IR does in fact > violate the rules for a MachineFunctionPass (see bullet 1 in > http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#the-machi...

Yes, global variables are the only way to access shared memory. I'm just trying to get an idea of what you're aiming to accomplish to see if we can improve on the interface here. A MachineFunctionPass runs after instruction selection and relying on doInitialization to run before instruction selection is an implementation detail that I do not believe is guaranteed anywhere (I could be wrong!). And modifying the IR does in fact violate the rules for a MachineFunctionPass (see bullet 1 in http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#the-machinefunctionpass-class...

Hi all I want my Looppass add some global variables(only once) before processing each loops(many times)in the module. Currently I add all global variables in the doInitialization of Looppass. It seems that doInitialization is called for each function of the module. Is it so? How to make my pass processing globals only once? yuanfang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/2011...

I have a whole slew of questions about optimization passes. Answers to any or all would be extremely helpful: How important are doInitialization/doFinalization? I can't detect any difference if I use them or not. Why does the function pass manager have doInitialization/doFinalization, but the global pass manager doesn't? If I am applying the function passes to many functions, do I doInitialization/run/doFinalization for each func...

...gt; https://reviews.llvm.org/D67687 > > Four member methods of a machine pass are recognized by the > machine pass manager: > (1) `PreservedAnalyses run(MachineFunction &, > MachineFunctionAnalysisManager &)`. Majority of the machine passes use > this. > (2) `Error doInitialization(Module &, > MachineFunctionAnalysisManager &)`. Passes like AsmPrinter needs a hook > to lower/transform global constructs. (invoked before all passes `run` > method) > (3) `Error doFinalization(Module &, > MachineFunctionAnalysisManager &)`. Client: PrintMIRPass. T...

Can you tell us a bit more about what you're trying to accomplish? Changes to the IR performed during MachineFunctionPass::doInitialization will likely propagate down through code generation, but at that point what is the purpose of using a MachineFunctionPass? You won't have any analysis or instruction information available until runOnMachineFunction. On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Anthony Yu <swpenim at gmail.com> wrot...

Antony, What are you trying to accomplish in this case? I did something very similar in the AMDIL backend, but it was not the cleanest solution and you are correct it has to be do at doInitialization stage and not at runOnMachineFunction. Micah > -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of Antony Yu > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 3:41 AM > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: [LLVMdev] Can I add Gl...

...l variables are the only way to access shared memory. >>> >>> I'm just trying to get an idea of what you're aiming to accomplish to >>> see if we can improve on the interface here. A MachineFunctionPass runs >>> after instruction selection and relying on doInitialization to run before >>> instruction selection is an implementation detail that I do not believe is >>> guaranteed anywhere (I could be wrong!). And modifying the IR does in fact >>> violate the rules for a MachineFunctionPass (see bullet 1 in >>> http://llvm.org/docs/...

...;> Yes, global variables are the only way to access shared memory. >> >> I'm just trying to get an idea of what you're aiming to accomplish to see >> if we can improve on the interface here. A MachineFunctionPass runs after >> instruction selection and relying on doInitialization to run before >> instruction selection is an implementation detail that I do not believe is >> guaranteed anywhere (I could be wrong!). And modifying the IR does in fact >> violate the rules for a MachineFunctionPass (see bullet 1 in >> http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPas...

Hello All, I have two questions, one more of an implementation question, the other more a design question. First: I noticed that if one moves the FPPassManager::doInitialization(Module) call from FPPassManager::runOnModule to MPPassManager::runOnModule (which is the new location I am aiming for to avoid the need for a doInitialization/doFinalization outside of the run methods, as preferred by Chris Lattner) some function passes fail. Notably the Address sanitizer test in t...

Hello All, I have two questions, one more of an implementation question, the other more a design question. First: I noticed that if one moves the FPPassManager::doInitialization(Module) call from FPPassManager::runOnModule to MPPassManager::runOnModule (which is the new location I am aiming for to avoid the need for a doInitialization/doFinalization outside of the run methods, as preferred by Chris Lattner) some function passes fail. Notably the Address sanitizer test in t...

A possible minor bug in lib/Target/X86/X86IntelAsmPrinter.cpp X86IntelAsmPrinter::doInitialization is calling AsmPrinter::doInitialization() not X86SharedAsmPrinter::doInitialization() Supprised I did not spot it earlier. Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20050703/2fb503f3/attachment.ht...