search for: path_of_libllvmdatastructure

...e are several tests, each with a different optimization. The benchmark is all the 11 C programs in CINT2000 of SPEC. In all the tests, I found very little performance difference between Andersen and Steensgaard. Here is an example of the options in one of the tests: llvmc -opt -Wo,=-O3 -Wo,=-load=path_of_libLLVMDataStructure.so -Wo,=-steens-aa llvmc -opt -Wo,=-O3 -Wo,=-anders-aa the other optimizations are: dead code elimination, dead store elimination, const propogation, O1, etc. And now what confusing me are: 1 Did the optimizations really use the result of Andersen or Steensgaard? 2 It seems both Andersen and Ste...

...e are several tests, each with a different optimization. The benchmark is all the 11 C programs in CINT2000 of SPEC. In all the tests, I found very little performance difference between Andersen and Steensgaard. Here is an example of the options in one of the tests: llvmc -opt -Wo,=-O3 -Wo,=-load=path_of_libLLVMDataStructure.so -Wo,=-steens-aa llvmc -opt -Wo,=-O3 -Wo,=-anders-aa the other optimizations are: dead code elimination, dead store elimination, const propogation, O1, etc. And now what confusing me are: 1 Did the optimizations really use the result of Andersen or Steensgaard? 2 It seems both Andersen and Ste...

聪明陈 wrote: > Hi LLVM dev team: > I am now doing an experiment to comparing Steensgaard-style and > Andersen-style pointer analysis on LLVM. Since steensgaard pointer > analysis is in module "poolalloc", so I installed poolalloc release > 2.6 on my machine(intel X86_64 RedHatEnterpriseLinux 5.1, gcc-4.2.4), > two directories "include" and "lib" were

Hi LLVM dev team: I am now doing an experiment to comparing Steensgaard-style and Andersen-style pointer analysis on LLVM. Since steensgaard pointer analysis is in module "poolalloc", so I installed poolalloc release 2.6 on my machine(intel X86_64 RedHatEnterpriseLinux 5.1, gcc-4.2.4), two directories "include" and "lib" were created after installation but no