search for: foldmallocmemset

...dead > stores. And I know why :D There was just -instcombine pass. I forgot to do > -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" code > there. > > I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you > would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for > llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? > We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines > should not do bad things. > > If I reopen D45344, reupload patch with removed my custom "store removal" > code, It...

...There was just -instcombine pass. I forgot to >> do -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store >> removal" code there. >> >> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you >> told you would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but >> extend it for llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad >> to do? >> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a  few  new >> lines should not do bad things. >> >> If I reopen D45344, reupload patch with removed...

Hello, I would like to find a way to do this removal properly. I found DSE and "eliminateNoopStore" can be useful for this thing. What I mean? int *test = malloc(15 * sizeof(int)); test[10] = 12; < ----- remove this store memset(test,0,sizeof(int) * 15); I already checked the function "eliminateNoopStore". Looks good, I think I would be to get the value ("A") we

...e was just -instcombine pass. I forgot to do >>> -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" code >>> there. >>> >>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you >>> would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >>> should not do bad things. >>> >>> If I reopen D45344, reupload patch with removed my custom...

...d I know why :D There was just -instcombine pass. I forgot to do >> -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" code >> there. >> >> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you >> would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >> should not do bad things. >> >> If I reopen D45344, reupload patch with removed my custom "store removal...

...ine pass. I forgot to do >>>> -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" code >>>> there. >>>> >>>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you >>>> would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >>>> should not do bad things. >>>> >>>> If I reopen D45344, reupload patch wi...

...-instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" >>> code there. >>> >>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. >>> Yes, you told you would like to see the whole >>> foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for llvm.memset in >>> InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a >>>  few  new lines should not do bad things. >>> >>> If I reop...

...o do >>>>> -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" code >>>>> there. >>>>> >>>>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you >>>>> would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>>>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>>>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >>>>> should not do bad things. >>>>> >>>>> If I reopen D4534...

...gt; to do -dse before -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" >>>>>> code there. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told >>>>>> you would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>>>>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>>>>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >>>>>> should not do bad things. >>>>>> >>>>>&g...

...re. >>>> >>>> I would like to finish malloc + >>>> llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told you >>>> would like to see the whole >>>> foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it >>>> for llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it >>>> really so bad to do? >>>> We have standard malloc + >>>> memset fold...

...efore -instcombine so this is why I did custom "store removal" >>>>>>> code there. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told >>>>>>> you would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>>>>>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>>>>>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new lines >>>>>>> should not do bad things. >>>>>>> >&g...

...ne so this is why I did custom "store removal" >>>>>>>> code there. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would like to finish malloc + llvm.memset folding. Yes, you told >>>>>>>> you would like to see the whole foldMallocMemset in DSE but extend it for >>>>>>>> llvm.memset in InstCombine... is it really so bad to do? >>>>>>>> We have standard malloc + memset folding there, so a few new >>>>>>>> lines should not do bad things. >>>>>&gt...