search for: mgupta

...lify before loop unroll. >From loop simplify.cpp This pass performs several transformations to transform natural loops into a00011 // simpler form, which makes subsequent analyses and transformations simpler and00012 // more effective. Arushi On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> wrote: > You mean like > > *llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc* > > But still i am not able to observe any effect on bit code by running > > *opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello.bc -o Hello_unroll.bc* > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Zakk...

...at LoopUnroll.cpp showed a comment that said -loop-rotate helps, so I used the following opt -mem2reg -loops -loopsimplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll -unroll-count=3 -debug loop.o -o tt.bc Getting an unrolled version of the loop. Arushi On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> wrote: > Even after all the sequence of commands below bit-code is not showing any > effect of loop-unrolling > > *manish at manish:~/Test2$ llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc > * > *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loops Hello.bc -o Hello1...

Hi, you need to run some optimization passes first. (like -O2) 2011/5/3 Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> > I just want to try loop-unroll and see corresponding changes in the bitcode > file. For that any loop will do. Have you been able to test llvm loop-unroll > successfully? > > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Yuan Pengfei <coolypf at qq.com> wrote:...

...rom loop simplify.cpp > > This pass performs several transformations to transform natural loops into a00011 // simpler form, which makes subsequent analyses and transformations simpler and00012 // more effective. > > > Arushi > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com>wrote: > >> You mean like >> >> *llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc* >> >> But still i am not able to observe any effect on bit code by running >> >> *opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello.bc -o Hello_unroll.bc* >> >&gt...

...ut still i am not able to observe any effect on bit code by running *opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello.bc -o Hello_unroll.bc* On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Zakk <zakk0610 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, you need to run some optimization passes first. (like -O2) > > 2011/5/3 Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> > >> I just want to try loop-unroll and see corresponding changes in the >> bitcode file. For that any loop will do. Have you been able to test llvm >> loop-unroll successfully? >> >> >> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Yuan Pengfei <c...

Hi, > The loop that I am trying it on is: > for(i=0; i< 1000; i++) > { > c[i] = a[i] + b[i]; > } I can't find any benefit unrolling this loop. ------------------ Yuan Pengfei Peking Unversity, China

I just want to try loop-unroll and see corresponding changes in the bitcode file. For that any loop will do. Have you been able to test llvm loop-unroll successfully? On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Yuan Pengfei <coolypf at qq.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > The loop that I am trying it on is: > > for(i=0; i< 1000; i++) > > { > > c[i] = a[i] + b[i]; > > }

Hi all I am trying hello pass in llvm. I have compiled and could generate LLVMHello.so but while giving the pass using opt i am getting below mentioned error. Command used: *opt-2.8 -load ../../cse231_project/llvm/llvm-2.9/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello < hello.bc* Error opening '../../cse231_project/llvm/llvm-2.9/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so':

I am trying loop-unroll optimization but it is not affecting the bit code. When I looked the loop unroll code it seems to be expecting three parameter(UnrollThreshold, UnrollCount, UnrollAllowPartial) from the user. Do I need to pass these parameter to activate loop unroll? *The loop that I am trying it on is:* for(i=0; i< 1000; i++) { c[i] = a[i] + b[i]; } -------------- next

opt: Unknown command line argument '-debug'. Try: 'opt -help' opt: Did you mean '-debug-aa'? what is the difference between debug and debug-aa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110504/fa362b40/attachment.html>

Hi, I am planning to extract every operation as function. eg. z=x+y; ==> z=func(x,y,op); I wish to write a custom definition of op. Which I would like to define in func. It would be really helpful if someone could suggest passes already available in llvm to for or point some reference how should one proceed on it. Is codeExtractor.cpp useful for this. I was also thinking of going like

I am posting this email again to the list.. hi list, recently i have noticed a scenerio in the * when the call goes from * without generating any cdr. The case is when i making an outgoing call using outgoing folder. I wrote the following info to sample.call Channel: Oh323/XXXXXXX Maxretries: 1 WaitTime: 30 Contex: incoming Extension: 1 Priority: 1 In Extension.conf i have [incoming]

Hi list, I am trying a scenerio where the * will take the email and mailbox number from the Mysql database for sendming mail to a voicemail user. I have seen vmdb.sql file but is not able to determine its use. I have created a table using that file but don't know how to use the fields from database in the dialplan of *. So it would be a great help if someone here could point me to a right

Hi I am encountering what I suspect to be a bug in the kernel processing of tc netlink messages: I am using kernel version 2.4.9 with iproute2-current-001007 package. Everything works fine in the kernel. Now I open a netlink socket with a user process, read the tc netlink messages generated by the tc process and parse them. What I see is that the kernel has already processed the messages

Hi list, I would like to know of a possible way to dial a pstn number with an extension . Let the number is 56626965-234 so now i wanna dial 56636965 then wait for some time and dial the extension 234 to reach a particular person.I am afraid that i could not figure it out. I am trying in this way.. [outgoing] exten=>_566X.,1,wait,2 exten=>_566X.,2,Dial(${EXTEN})