search for: looprotation

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 safe to hoist.  Doing this doesn't change the > order of >      // execution in the preheader, but does prevent the instruction from &g...

...t driver, opt.cpp to see how to do this. You can call addRequired<X> from your pass to force the PassManager to run X before your pass. If you want to do these transformations within a single pass, then the transformations need to be exposed as a utility. llvm::UnrollLoop() currently is, but LoopRotation is not. LoopRotation could be exposed as a utility (or you could copy the relevant code), but you should try not to do that. The llvm strategy is that loop rotation should do the right thing when it runs before your pass. If loop rotation needs more information to what you want it to do, then you c...

Hello, I wrote my own pass which needs to do some loop unrolling. I can perform loop unrolling via opt: opt -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll -unroll-count=50 mytest.bc -o mytest.bc This command works perfectly. However, what I really want is to produce the **same behavior** but from my own pass (i.e., I don't want to use opt). I wrote a Module pass which

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 prevent the instruction from // executing in each i...

NFC: Restructuring LoopRoration.cpp to create Loop Rotation Pass with Loop Rotation Utility Interface ============================================================================= Why this NFC change? ================= The existing LoopRotation.cpp is implemented as one of loop passes instead of being a utility. The user cannot easily perform the loop rotation selectively (or on demand) under different optimization level. For example, the loop rotation is needed as part of the logic to convert a loop into a loop with bottom test for a tra...

Hi Stefanos, Thanks for your comments. I added both as reviewer. > One question though. Are you sure that this: > This helps with LICM when instructions inside a conditional is loop invariant  > is not achieved with the current LoopRotate pass? Because AFAIK, it does. Basically it inserts > a guard (that branches to the preheader) and then passes like LICM hoist invariant

...sion 2.9 based upon llvm 2.9svn hosted on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu #include "..." search starts here: #include <...> search starts here: /usr/local/include /home/csaba/bin/../lib/clang/2.9/include /usr/include End of search list. clang: /home/csaba/LLVM/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRotation.cpp:343: bool<unnamed>::LoopRotate::rotateLoop(llvm::Loop*): Assertion `DidIt && "Block merge failed??"' failed. 0 clang 0x00000000019cbeaf 1 clang 0x00000000019cc9ea 2 libpthread.so.0 0x00007f23a40982e0 3 libc.so.6 0x00007f23a33e09e5 gsigna...

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:58 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:57 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> / * snip */ >> >> Actually, rebuilding it makes "debug tblgen" fail with the errors at >> the

Thanks for your reply. Maybe it wasn't so clear, but the optimization I'm writing is target-dependent and so it's declared inside the target backend and is run after the independent optimizer. So I cannot run my pass just after LoopRotate and before InstCombine. I can still use ScalarEvolution, but the instruction combiner can in some cases simplify the entry guard condition. A small

Seems that adding -extra-vectorizer-passes doesn't help to vectorizer in my case. LoopRotation re-run does nothing. 2014-10-15 2:54 GMT+04:00 Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>: > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: >> >> > I have and will continue to push >> > back on trying to add it until we at least...

On Feb 7, 2013, at 8:40 AM, Michele Scandale <michele.scandale at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your reply. > > Maybe it wasn't so clear, but the optimization I'm writing is target-dependent > and so it's declared inside the target backend and is run after the independent > optimizer. So I cannot run my pass just after LoopRotate and before InstCombine. > I

Hi all, Apparently some people had trouble joining today. I also had trouble using the attendee ID provided by webex. I've canceled the meeting series and will be scheduling a new one with an updated link. Please remember to update your calendars with the new invite. My apologies to those who couldn't join today, and to everyone for the churn. Today's Meeting Minutes:

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

hi, I had an implementation of loop-rotation that peels the loop such that each conditional is executed at least once. https://reviews.llvm.org/D22630 This helps with LICM when instructions inside a conditional is loop invariant. The patch has decent number of test cases. All the requested comments were addressed at that time. I'm happy to rebase and put the patch again. -Aditya

Hi All, In the attached test case there, is an unnested loop with 2 iterations. The loop latch block is terminated by an unconditional branch, so simplifycfg folds the almost empty latch block into its predecessor which is the loop header. This results in an additional backedge in the CFG, so when LoopRotate pass is called it canonicalizes the loop into a nested loop. However, now the loop

On Feb 4, 2013, at 10:48 AM, Michele Scandale <michele.scandale at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm working on a late IR target dependent optimization on loops. A part of this > optimization requires to derive "by hand" the trip-count expression of a given > loop. In order to handle correctly these cases I need to check if the loop has > an entry guard

Hello, I have two for loops (one inside the other), that after indvars, looprotate, etc. (the important here is the loop rotate), is similar to this (I've stripped the real operations): define i32 @f() nounwind { entry: br label %bb1 bb1: ; preds = %bb3, %bb1, %entry %i.0.reg2mem.0.ph = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.0.reg2mem.0.ph, %bb1 ], [ %indvar.next9, %bb3 ] ;

Hi Tobias, I am trying to move Polly later. LLVM provides some predefined ExtensionPointTy: EP_EarlyAsPossible, EP_ModuleOptimizerEarly, EP_LoopOptimizerEnd, EP_ScalarOptimizerLate, ... Currently Polly uses "EP_EarlyAsPossible" to run as early as possible. As what you suggested: >Instead of removing canonicalization passes, I believe we may want to >move

On 11.01.2011, at 12:02, Csaba Raduly wrote: > clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) > Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > Thread model: posix > > Fails to compile ctags 5.8 (also 5.6), specifically eiffel.c: > > $ clang -v -c e.c -O2 -Wno-unused-value > clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) […] > bool<unnamed>::LoopRotate::rotateLoop(llvm::Loop*): Assertion `DidIt >

Hello, I wrote my own pass which needs to do some loop unrolling. I can perform loop unrolling via opt: opt -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll -unroll-count=50 mytest.bc -o mytest.bc This command works perfectly. However, what I really want is to produce the **same behavior** but from my own pass (i.e., I don't want to use opt). I wrote a Module pass which