search for: passtyp

...dd those FPs to CurrentAnalyses. Should we have a map of BatcherClasses - (function, BatcherClass) pairs instead of just one BatcherClass? 3 - Provide API for the MP to get an analysis per function. (generally, for the PassClass to get analysis per SubPassClass): Instead of this: getAnalysis<PassType>() the natural thing would seem to be (for PassClass = MP and SubPassClass = FP): getAnalysis<PassType>(Function) This simple change does mean some big moving in the background, though, since (for starters) the PassInfoMap can't just key on the TypeInfo anymore. It will need to ke...

.... Writing the clone() method for FunctionPass objects is an annoying thing to have to do, but is purely mechanical. > 3 - Provide API for the MP to get an analysis per function. (generally, > for the PassClass to get analysis per SubPassClass): > > Instead of this: > getAnalysis<PassType>() > the natural thing would seem to be (for PassClass = MP and SubPassClass > = FP): > getAnalysis<PassType>(Function) Yes. This makes a lot of sense. In the future, only the "ModulePass" class will have this new getAnalysis<T>(Function*) method, but for now i...

...* to work with either, some have errors if you use it wrong. I haven't found a way to tell without trying, and no indications that I'm not using it wrong but in a way that's too subtle to crash or catch it. > Have you read this document? http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#passtype It should explain what doInit and doFinalization means and when they are executed.. plus tons more good stuff. -Tanya > Is the best protocol to do function passes first, then global? After that, should you do function passes again for good measure, or is that redundant? Does inlining go b...

On Aug 11, 2010, at 5:57 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > Have you read this document? > http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#passtype Yes, but I didn't find it as instructive as I'd hoped. The only two examples of pass sets I can find are the Kaleidoscope tutorial and StandardPasses.h (corresponding, I assume, to what llvm-gcc does). Just looking at the two of these, some passes are done as function passes in one, but...

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > > You're right that FunctionPass's are not supposed to have state > > (something that many people overlook :) ), however, for now, nothing > > will break if it does have state, and this is really the only way > > around this. > > I'm not sure if I can do this. The pass I'm writing is writing info >

...uld have to be different from just creating a new Pass with the default constructor... >> 3 - Provide API for the MP to get an analysis per function. >> (generally, >> for the PassClass to get analysis per SubPassClass): >> >> Instead of this: >> getAnalysis<PassType>() >> the natural thing would seem to be (for PassClass = MP and >> SubPassClass >> = FP): >> getAnalysis<PassType>(Function) > > Yes. This makes a lot of sense. In the future, only the "ModulePass" > class will have this new getAnalysis<T&...

On Aug 5, 2004, at 5:30 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Michael McCracken wrote: > >> Hi, I have a hopefully quick question. I'm writing a Pass that needs >> to >> see a whole module at a time and keep some state, so I subclassed >> Pass. >> However, I want to be able to see the Loops in each Function. Roughly, > > ok. > >>

...should've asked what type of Pass your custom AA is, but this is a common problem where someone writes an AA as a FunctionPass (or uses Andersen's AA before we removed it from the tree) and it doesn't live through the whole execution. See http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#passtype and below for a list of the passes and their requirements. (Yes, BasicAA really does meet the requirements for an immutable pass. It stores no state and the copy/delete/replace functions are all no-ops.) Nick > > Thanks. > Rajesh > >> I read in the same llvm doc that the...

I have a whole slew of questions about optimization passes. Answers to any or all would be extremely helpful: How important are doInitialization/doFinalization? I can't detect any difference if I use them or not. Why does the function pass manager have doInitialization/doFinalization, but the global pass manager doesn't? If I am applying the function passes to many functions, do I

...se? I think the key points here is that we group passes, order those groups of passes and then finally run those ordered groups of passes. The batcher hierarchy you presented makes sense. I'm simply trying to shake the gut feeling that I have, relating to how extensible this will be if a new passtype is desired, for instance. -- Regards.

Hi, I am using LLVM 2.4 on a Linux RHEL5 machine. I was trying to figure out how the chaining of the alias analysis passes works in LLVM. Here are the command I used to test the chaining part. 1. ./opt hello_world_1_nest_func.bc -o hello_world_1_nest_func_AA.bc -no-aa -anders-aa -licm Result: Anderson's AA and No Alias Analysis both are called. 2. ./opt hello_world_1_nest_func.bc -o

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Saem Ghani wrote: > The patch below basically hammers out some ideas as to where I'd like > to take the passmanager in LLVM. I've tried thinking things through, > but I'm still a n00b, so some criticism would be more than welcome. =) > > Starting from line 191 down. If you're wondering why I created a > patch, well that's because I found

The patch below basically hammers out some ideas as to where I'd like to take the passmanager in LLVM. I've tried thinking things through, but I'm still a n00b, so some criticism would be more than welcome. =) Starting from line 191 down. If you're wondering why I created a patch, well that's because I found thinking in passmanagert.h the most productive. -- Regards.