search for: lowersetjmp

This pains me to ask, because I'm the original author of this pass, but is the LowerSetJmp pass dead? I created a simple program, manually converted it to use the @llvm.setjmp/@llvm.longjmp intrinsics, ran "opt -lowersetjmp" on it, and tried to compile it only to get this: Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64: "___llvm_sjljeh_throw_longjmp", referenced from:...

Hi In llvm src the file llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/LowerSetJmp.cpp, it seems for sjlj-eh ? but this pass has no effect about c++ sjlj-eh. this pass is for future extend? zhangzw

Hi zhangzw, > In llvm src the file llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/LowerSetJmp.cpp, it > seems for sjlj-eh ? it's not for sjlj-eh. The problem with setjmp/longjmp is that they can jump from one part of a function to any other part, which means that the control-flow graph is pointless; this makes everything more complicated. So how to deal with this? LLVM does have...

On Feb 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > So LLVM turns setjmp/longjmp > into a bunch of invokes and unwinds, in order to generate correct code > while not having to teach all the optimizers about setjmp/longjmp. > Setjmp/longjmp eh is something different. Or virtually identical. Bout the only difference is the number of registers saved and the order of those registers.

> Or virtually identical. Bout the only difference is the number of > registers saved and the order of those registers. What needs to be done to get g++ to use sj/lj style exception handling? Thanks, Duncan.

On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:28 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> Or virtually identical. Bout the only difference is the number of >> registers saved and the order of those registers. > > What needs to be done to get g++ to use sj/lj style exception > handling? Many different ways, the easiest, most experimental way would be: --enable-sjlj-exceptions

Hi Anton, > > I would expect llvm-gcc to use LLVM's setjmp/longjmp intrinsics and > > then to run the LowerSetJmp pass to turn the intrinsic calls into uses > > of invoke and unwind. At that point, the control flow is explicit, > > isn't it? > Unfortunately, no. You can call setjmp/longjmp on the same jump buffer > multiple times. So, in general it's not possible to determine, where &...

...ented. (That said, at the moment, LLVM doesn't correctly support messing with rounding modes at the moment; it doesn't know that floating-point operations depend on the FP control register.) > llvm.longjmp > llvm.setjmp > llvm.siglongjmp > llvm.sigsetjmp These are used by the LowerSetJmp pass; however, llvm-gcc doesn't use that pass, and the code itself hasn't been touched for years. Anyone know if LowerSetJmp still works/whether there are any known bugs/why llvm-gcc isn't using this pass? -Eli

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Mahadevan R wrote: >> While going through the list of intrinsics in Intrinsics.td, I found >> that it does not match the list given in Language Reference [1]. Does >> this mean that they are not to be used / don't work? Or is it just >> that the documentation is

...t codes in > PostDominance.cpp in SVN trunk, but I found some relevant codes here > http://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-137/src/lib/Analysis/PostDominators.cpp. LLVM 3.0 release note said postdomfrontier had been removed [1]. The unused PostOrder Dominator Frontiers and LowerSetJmp passes were removed. I'll send patch to update the document. Regards, chenwj [1] http://llvm.org/releases/3.0/docs/ReleaseNotes.html -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.) Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667 Homepage: http...

...ipt* Following the way proposed by Chris, it is good to have a script to scan the standard LLVM transform pass list. We can get the standard compile optimization pass list by: $ opt -std-compile-opts -debug-pass=Arguments foo.bc > /dev/null Pass Arguments: -preverify -domtree -verify -lowersetjmp -raiseallocs -simplifycfg -domtree -domfrontier -mem2reg -globalopt -globaldce -ipconstprop -deadargelim -instcombine -simplifycfg -basiccg -prune-eh -inline -argpromotion -tailduplicate -simplify-libcalls -instcombine -jump-threading -simplifycfg -domtree -domfrontier -scalarrepl -instcombine -bre...

Hi, I found the -postdomfrontier pass in *llvm*.org/docs/Passes.html, but 'opt' does not accept it. I could not find the relevant codes in PostDominance.cpp in SVN trunk, but I found some relevant codes here http://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-137/src/lib/Analysis/PostDominators.cpp. I am wondering why this pass is removed and what should I do if I want the post

instcombine doesn't seem to be doing it. From my testing it seems to only occur when I use -indvars after a long string of commands. For example: llvm-as < test_fc_27.ll | opt -preverify -domtree -verify -lowersetjmp -raiseallocs -simplifycfg -domtree -domfrontier -mem2reg -globalopt -globaldce -ipconstprop -deadargelim -instcombine -simplifycfg -ba siccg -prune-eh -inline -argpromotion -simplify-libcalls -instcombine -jump-threading -simplifycfg -domtree -domfrontier -scalarrepl -instcombine...

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2008, at 8:58 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > > What optimization pass promotes 32 bit math operations to 64 bit operations > so I can disable it? I have code that works fine with optimizations turned > off but fails with it turned on because of this stage. > > > Do you have a

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 02:32:25AM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > Ok, after pasting the output from "gccas -debug-pass=Arguments > </dev/null -o - >/dev/null" I get the following: > > bugpoint -verify -lowersetjmp -funcresolve -raiseallocs -simplifycfg > -mem2reg -globalopt -globaldce -ipconstprop -deadargelim -instcombine > -simplifycfg -prune-eh -inline -argpromotion -raise -tailduplicate > -simplifycfg -scalarrepl -instcombine -tailcallelim -simplifycfg > -loopsimplify -licm-reassociate -i...

Hello, Jay. > the resulting bitcode doesn't use LLVM's exception handling > intrinsics, it just has a call to a function called "_setjmp". And > there doesn't seem to be any provision for returning the current value > of the volatile variable v if setjmp returns non-zero - the bitcode > always returns zero, whereas the spec for setjmp() says that f() >

Hi Everyone, Can Someone tell me all the interprocedural optimizations that LLVM 2.1 supports. Thank You, Naineet Patel CSE IITB

Does anyone have experience to compile Linux kernel in LLVM-2.6? I am working on a C/C++ race detection framework and want to test in large applications. But I do have a lot of errors while compiling Linux kernel 2.6.3 using LLVM-2.6. Actually, I only need to get the .bc bitcode file. Anyboy does similar work before? Which Linux kernel version is used and any skills? Thanks. Lei /****** * Lei

> If you're running opt on the command line directly, then use the > "-p" option. See "-help" for more information on that. > > -bw > I have a couple of more questions. 1. Does -std-compile-opts of opt do the same optimization with llvm-gcc with -O[1-3] options? If I want to debug into passes through llvm-gcc, how do I set a breakpoint right before pass

...ject/llvm/trunk at 138841 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 diff --git a/docs/ReleaseNotes.html b/docs/ReleaseNotes.html index 6188ffd4..4feb907 100644 --- a/docs/ReleaseNotes.html +++ b/docs/ReleaseNotes.html @@ -583,6 +583,8 @@ it run faster:</p> <ul> <li>The <code>LowerSetJmp</code> pass wasn't used effectively by any target and has been removed.</li> + <li>The old <code>TailDup</code> pass was not used in the standard pipeline + and was unable to update ssa form, so it has been removed. <li>The syntax of volatile...