search for: lakeman

...r and then stores this value to multiple destinations, would it be ideal to store the value in an allocated temporary? would the load be called for each store if I don't allocate a temporary or will the load be called only the one time? - Paul ________________________________ From: jeremy at lakeman.me <jeremy at lakeman.me> on behalf of Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> Sent: 16 March 2016 14:24 To: Paul Hancock Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] IRBuilder Assignment ( '=' ) operator? There is a store operation if you want the value on the s...

On 11 June 2017 at 23:06, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> wrote: > http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#the-isa-cast-and-dyn-cast- > templates > I understand isa and dyn-cast let you test the type of an object at run-time by leveraging LLVM's custom implementation of RTTI. However, it doesn't m...

Are you saying the textual form of IR can change, but bitcode doesn't? I don't know what you mean by assembly syntax. Is there a changlog entry when the textual IR changes? On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:22 AM, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> wrote: > Assembly syntax can and will break between versions. But bitcode should > generally be upgradeable, or a bug should be filed. > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Hayden Livingston <halivingston at gmail.com > > wrote: > >>...

...your code. > > I was wondering on the role played by flags in detecting redundancies. At > first I thought one need to consider only operands and operators. Now I > understand flags also play a role. > > Thanks, > Rekha > > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com > > wrote: > >> IMHO; >> On undefined behaviour we can do whatever we want. If the "add nsw" >> overflows this would lead to undefined behaviour. >> Therefore we can assume that "add", with the same arguments will...

...ng the stack isn't a great idea for size reasons. While I'm experimenting with simple code examples now, and I picked a simple one for this email. I'm certain things will get much more complicated once I implement more features of the language. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>wrote: > The front end I'm building for an existing interpreted language is > unfortunately producing output similar to this far too often; > > define void @foo(i8* nocapture %dest, i8* nocapture %src, i32 %len) > nounwind { > %1 = tail ca...

The front end I'm building for an existing interpreted language is unfortunately producing output similar to this far too often; define void @foo(i8* nocapture %dest, i8* nocapture %src, i32 %len) nounwind { %1 = tail call noalias i8* @malloc(i32 %len) nounwind tail call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i32(i8* %1, i8* %src, i32 %len, i32 1, i1 false) tail call void

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 5:54 AM James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 7:40 PM Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Semantic versioning would recommend "v8.0.0-dev", "v8.0.0-rc1" etc. The hyphen indicating that this is a pre-release version coming before "v8.0.0" > > > Here's my proposal: > - Release branch...

...imizations on memory operations, but the benefit > seems to be not so much. > > Furthermore, I strongly agree with Jeremy in that instruction orders > should be preserved for -O1 for debugging purposes. > > Thank you, > Jeehoon > > > 2015-02-21 21:41 GMT+09:00 Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com > <mailto:Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>>: > > > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 6:38 PM, David Chisnall > <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk <mailto:David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk>> > wrote: > > > > On...

James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 5:46 PM David Jones <dlj at google.com> wrote: >> $ git tag -m 'Begin development of 8.0.0.' '8.0.0svn' 63297479398 >> >> Then, `git describe` can give a useful result that would be stable(-ish >> [*]): >> >> $ git describe --match=\*svn

James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> writes: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 7:40 PM Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Semantic versioning would recommend "v8.0.0-dev", "v8.0.0-rc1" etc. The >> hyphen indicating that this is a pre-release version coming before "v8.0.0" > > > Here's my proposal: > - Rele...

Hey Jeremy, (putting the discussion back to the list.) 2013/12/8 Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>: > If I run your demo exe it crashes, if I re-link the dll with VS 2010 it > errors gracefully; > > runtime error R6030 > - CRT not initialized > > putchar is a c runtime function. > I'm betting that your exe doesn't initialise the...

The difference is that %x would be just a generic pointer type, but the type would still need to be supplied as an argument to the GEP / load / store. %inner.ptr = getelementptr i8**, %x, i32 1 You could think of it as having an implicit bitcast on every pointer operation. On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > How would GEP's look

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 6:38 PM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk > wrote: > > > On 21 Feb 2015, at 05:59, Jeehoon Kang <jeehoon.kang at sf.snu.ac.kr> > wrote: > > > > this is Jeehoon Kang, a CS PhD student and a newbie to LLVM. > > > > I am wondering why LLVM IR's basic block consists of a list of > instructions, > >

IMHO; On undefined behaviour we can do whatever we want. If the "add nsw" overflows this would lead to undefined behaviour. Therefore we can assume that "add", with the same arguments will not overflow. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > On 23 July 2014 06:25, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: >

...std::string add(std::string a, std::string b){ return a+b; } When allocating the buffer required for the new string, one can determine the length at runtime, however I do not know how one can allocate a global array with its size determined by a Value*. On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>wrote: > The toy language I've been playing around with represents all strings as a > struct in llvm; > > struct string{ > char *ptr; > int str_len; > int buffer_len; > } > > And my AST has an interface like; > > Stri...

..._state - (if branch) and *pointer2 & predicted_state - (else branch) right? Or out-of-processor's allow such access? Plus, why we are masking with all_zeros_mask during mis-prediction. Is there any reason for choosing all_zeros_mask? Cheers, Praveen On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 17:08, Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> wrote: > There's a difference between control flow speculation and data flow. > By entangling the control flow & data, the cpu should stall the memory > load until the condition is known, since the pointer value also isn't known. > > I...

Jeremy Lakeman via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > 4. Each reviewed bug / feature must be rebased onto the current "known > good" commit, merged into a "probably good" commit, tested by build > bots, and only then pushed to trunk. Keeping trunk's history mor...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nuno Lopes" <nunoplopes at sapo.pt> > To: "Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>, "Jeremy Lakeman" <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>, nlewycky at google.com > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2015 6:08:52 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] readonly and infinite loops > > People have been aware of this issue for...

...tch for git though, it will have to do it itself. Would that still work? I am not sure I will have time to work on improving that. For those who want to try it out I put it there: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44244 And yes, this uses all possible forms of ugly. :-) On Wed, Mar 7, 2018, 18:14 Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com> wrote: > Could you format the output so that it is compatible with git fast-import? > https://www.git-scm.com/docs/git-fast-import > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:34 AM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >...

A: When the types are created in different contexts. I've been running into a module validation error related to phi nodes produced by the GVN pass, where the types of the incoming values aren't the same instance of IntegerType i1. I'm not certain I've found the root cause of the problem yet, it's probably due to my handling of LLVMContext & Module life cycles, and this