search for: irunitts

Hi all, I am trying to use LLVM's AliasAnalysis pass, but from a standalone tool that uses llvm libraries. The following is the code snippet I am currently using. PassBuilder PB; auto mod_manager = ModuleAnalysisManager { }; PB.registerModuleAnalyses(mod_manager); AAResults& AAR = mod_manager.getResult<AAManager>(*M); But the code fails at .getResult with the following error:

Hi Philip, Thanks for the response. Under llvm-5.0.2 and llvm-6.0.1 in Debug mode, the crash hit at the same assertion: /usr/local/include/llvm/IR/PassManager.h:689: typename PassT::Result& llvm::AnalysisManager<IRUnitT, ExtraArgTs>::getResult(IRUnitT&, ExtraArgTs ...) [with PassT = llvm::InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<llvm::AnalysisManager<llvm::Loop,

Okay, did the big renaming and de-templating today (and removing the proxies). check-llvm worked fine, except that this test caught a bug (yay!): unittests/IR/PassManagerTest.cpp:326 After removing the proxies, the module pass is not invalidating the function passes (since the invalidation is on the module IRUnit). we now don't have a method for delegating the invalidation from outer

I'm not quite sure what post to respond to for a status update, but I guess this one will do (and you can check my log for more info of course). My current working branch for the analysis manager stuff is at https://github.com/chisophugis/llvm/commits/analysis-manager (4ecf6115890bd01caa52c0b99424974e3469291e) I described in my log a bit more my thought process and how to do this without

I have the unified analysis manager implemented now and passing all tests at: https://github.com/chisophugis/llvm/commits/analysis-manager One caveat: It would be a layering violation for the analysis manager to know about Loop and SCC since those live in libAnalysis. So currently I have some stuff commented out for imitating the proxy downward invalidation for them. (and generally the proxy

I'm migrating from 3.3 to 3.8 and am having a few problems. `CreateStructGEP` requires a type parameter now. I'm not sure what type it's expecting, so I converted `CreateStructGEP( valuePtr, index )` to `CreateStructGEP( valuePtr->getType(), valuePtr, index )`... would that be correct? `arg_iterator` no longer converst to Value*, I have a lot of this now: &*(args++) This

...use we could make the analysis reacquire the >> pointer at the start of every query. Holding SCEV* is the problem. >> > > Looks like SCEV* at least is held only by LoopAccessInfo. (Looks like LAA > holds Loop* too) > Note that Loop (and SCC) are somewhat special as they are IRUnitTs and might as a consequence be more reasonable to hold on to and expect definitive invalidation to occur. But I say "might". I think this will be case-by-case depending on how they're being used. > New updated rendering at http://reviews.llvm.org/F2161258 > (DependenceAnalysis...

...ntal problem because we could make the analysis reacquire the pointer at the start of every query. Holding SCEV* is the problem. > > Looks like SCEV* at least is held only by LoopAccessInfo. (Looks like LAA holds Loop* too) > > Note that Loop (and SCC) are somewhat special as they are IRUnitTs and might as a consequence be more reasonable to hold on to and expect definitive invalidation to occur. But I say "might". I think this will be case-by-case depending on how they're being used. > > New updated rendering at http://reviews.llvm.org/F2161258 <http://reviews.l...

The more closely I look at this, the more it seems like there may be a useful incremental step in the transition to the new PM: use the new PM analysis machinery in the old PM. If this is possible, it will simplify the old PM and (hopefully) allow an incremental transition to the new PM instead of a flag day transition for the switch. I.e., AFAICT, the new PM transition is essentially about 2

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Jul 25, 2016 6:16 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com<mailto:chisophugis at gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov<mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: >> >> >> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: "Sean

This question has been submitted to stackoverflow (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51934964/function-optimization-pass) but someone suggested me that it should be submitted to llvm-dev mailing list instead. I'm sorry for the duplication. I am trying to use PassBulider and FunctionPassManager || to optimize a function in a module, what I have done is: mod = ...load module from LLVM

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:25 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > It looks like there is really no sane fix within the current > infrastructure. I've had to essentially trigger invalidation (except in the > PreservedAnalyses::all() case) in the function pass manager and function to > loop adapters. > invalidation of *everything* I mean. -- Sean Silva

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 3:40 PM Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> *Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID* >> >> On Jul 25, 2016 6:16 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "Xinliang David Li" <davidxl at google.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Davide Italiano" > <dccitaliano at gmail.com>, "Tim Amini Golling" >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Xinliang David Li" <davidxl at google.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Davide Italiano" > <dccitaliano at gmail.com>, "Tim Amini Golling" >

Hi Sean, Thanks for writing all of this up. I'll go back to my previous position: we need a general dependency graph built as the analysis cache is used. It should have the following properties: 1. When we call getResult or getCachedResult on an analysis manager, we record a dependency of the current pass on the returned result. 2. This dependency needs to be stored such that it can be

We need better terminology to talk about this. I propose: analysis-dependencies: analysis A uses result of analysis B when *running* an analysis and not used by the result query-dependencies: result of analysis A uses result of analysis B when evaluating a query data-structure-depnedencies: result of analysis A uses data structures from the result of analysis B inside its own data structures I

On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Skimming the thread, this post is the clearest path forward I've seen. > Minor comments inline, but I generally like this framing. > > On 07/14/2016 08:04 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote: > > We need better terminology to talk about this. I propose: > >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com>, "Xinliang David Li" > <davidxl at google.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Davide > Italiano" <dccitaliano at