search for: loopbodi

I am splitting a one BB loop into two BB. Basically, the one loop BB has 3 incoming values, one form back edge two from other edges. I want to extract the PHIs from the other two edges out into it's own BB and delete that from the loop, then redirect the backedge to the loopbody (non extracted portion) and create a new PHI coming from the extracted BB and the backedge. I can do this;

Here is the code snippet that I am using to create the PHIs in the loop according to the PHIs in the new preheader. At this point I have already redirected the loop backedge and removed the preheader from the loop. for (BasicBlock::iterator II = loopHeaderBB->begin(); (PN=dyn_cast<PHINode>(II)); ++II) { // remove loop back PHI and add it to split BB

It sounds like Transforms/Utils/SSAUpdater may be what you are looking for. A good example of how to use it -- one that sounds very similar to what you're doing -- can be found in Transforms/Scalar/LoopRotation.cpp On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > I am splitting a one BB loop into two BB. > > Basically, the one loop BB has 3 incoming

I have attached a case of what I am trying to do, I'm pretty sure I'm just missing some simple API call. In the cfg you can see that although Im setting "lsr.iv441" as "lsr.iv44" from for.body.387.i it's not propagating that through the block or graph. On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > I am splitting a one BB

I guess I thought that once I redirected the branches and created new PHIs that LLVM would correct the variable usage when I return true (changed CFG) from the pass. Is this not the case? On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > Here is the code snippet that I am using to create the PHIs in the loop > according to the PHIs in the new preheader. At

Hi, I've tracked the first problem (mentioned in my previous email, quoted below) down further, ending up in the handling of alloca in LoopRotation.cpp (from trunk): // If the instruction's operands are invariant and it doesn't read or write // memory, then it is safe to hoist. Doing this doesn't change the order of // execution in the preheader, but does

2012/2/3 Patrik Hägglund <patrik.h.hagglund at ericsson.com>: > Hi, > > I've tracked the first problem (mentioned in my previous email, quoted > below) down further, ending up in the handling of alloca in > LoopRotation.cpp (from trunk): > >      // If the instruction's operands are invariant and it doesn't read > or write >      // memory, then it is

Hi, I have two problems regarding the llvm.stackrestore intrinsic. I'm running on 3.0, but a quick test on trunk also showed the same behavior. First problem: --------------- I have code like: tmp1 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp2 = alloca [do some stuff with tmp2] call llvm.stackrestore(tmp1) [some other stuff] tmp3 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp4 = alloca [do some stuff

On 01/08/14 19:37, Reid Kleckner wrote: > What happens if you drop appending linkage? I think it will just work, > since you are already using a custom section, which will ensure that all > the data appears contiguously in memory. Thanks for the suggestion, but it still puts everything in a single .section statement. > Although, I do worry about what LLVM's alias analysis will

On 04 Aug 2014, at 09:27, Reid Kleckner wrote: > On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Jonas Maebe > <jonas.maebe at elis.ugent.be> > wrote: > >> On 01/08/14 19:37, Reid Kleckner wrote: >> >>> What happens if you drop appending linkage? I think it will just >>> work, >>> since you are already using a custom section, which will ensure

Hi Justin, the non-translatable IR with GPU code replaced by appropriate CUDA Driver > API calls. One of CUDA driver apis (cuLaunch) need a ptx asm string as its input. So if I want to provide a one-touch solution and don't introduce any changes to tools outside polly, I must prepare the ptx string before I can generate the correct non-translatable IR part. As your suggestion, It may

Hi Justin, 2012/4/3 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> > *Motivation* >> With the broad proliferation of GPU computing, it is very important to >> provide an easy and automatic tool to develop or port the applications to >> GPU for normal developers, especially for those domain experts who want to >> harness the huge computing power of GPU. Polly