Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "hello4".
Did you mean:
hello
2011 May 03
0
[LLVMdev] Loop-Unroll optimization
...mit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc*
*manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loops Hello.bc -o Hello1.bc*
*manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loopsimplify Hello1.bc -o Hello2.bc*
*manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -indvars Hello2.bc -o Hello3.bc*
*manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello3.bc -o Hello4.bc*
*manish at manish:~/Test2$ llvm-dis-2.8 Hello4.bc*
My *Hello.c* looks like:
for(i=0; i< 1000; i++)
{
c[i] = a[i] + b[i];
}
printf("%d\n", c[999]);
-------------------------------------------------
and bit-code in *Hello4.bc*
bb3:...
2011 May 04
1
[LLVMdev] Loop-Unroll optimization
...lo.bc
> *
> *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loops Hello.bc -o Hello1.bc*
> *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loopsimplify Hello1.bc -o Hello2.bc*
> *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -indvars Hello2.bc -o Hello3.bc*
> *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello3.bc -o Hello4.bc*
> *manish at manish:~/Test2$ llvm-dis-2.8 Hello4.bc*
>
> My *Hello.c* looks like:
> for(i=0; i< 1000; i++)
> {
> c[i] = a[i] + b[i];
> }
>
> printf("%d\n", c[999]);
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> and bi...
2011 May 03
3
[LLVMdev] Loop-Unroll optimization
Hi,
You might want to try running -loops -loop-simplify before loop unroll.
>From loop simplify.cpp
This pass performs several transformations to transform natural loops
into a00011 // simpler form, which makes subsequent analyses and
transformations simpler and00012 // more effective.
Arushi
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> wrote:
> You
2009 Dec 18
1
[LLVMdev] Compiling a raw binary with llvm/clang
$ clang -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -Os -nostartfiles -c -o hello.o
hello.c
$ clang -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -Os -nostartfiles -c -o test.o
test.c
$ llvm-ld -s -o hello2 hello.o
$ llc hello2.bc -o hello3
$ ld -o hello_B hello3 --oformat binary
ld:hello3: file format not recognized; treating as linker script
ld:hello3:1: syntax error
I am guessing that is what you meant by the
2020 May 04
2
[EXTERNAL] How to get branch coverage by using 'source-based code coverage'
...b = 4;
}
return 0;
}
*Coverage build commands*
#!/bin/bash
g++ -o simple -fno-exceptions -fno-inline -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage
simple.cc
./simple "foo"
./simple "bar"
./simple "hello1"
./simple "hello2"
./simple "hello3"
./simple "hello4"
./simple "hello5"
./simple "hello6"
./simple "hello7"
./simple "hello8"
lcov --rc lcov_branch_coverage=1 --capture --directory . --output-file
simple.lcov.info
genhtml simple.lcov.info --function-coverage --branch-coverage
--output-directory lcov_out/
g...
2020 May 03
2
[EXTERNAL] How to get branch coverage by using 'source-based code coverage'
Hi, Alan
Really very excited to receive your email and sorry to be slow replying, it
has been exceptionally busy over the last few days ;(
Your explanation made the problem clear to me. So gcov branch coverage
should be called condition coverage and clang region coverage
is branch coverage in fact(also known as *decision/C1*), right?
And llvm/clang will support all the following coverage