search for: postdominancefronti

When analysing a function "fn", my FunctionPass needs some PostDominanceFrontier information of functions which are called by function "fn". getAnalysis<PostDominanceFrontier>() cannot give the information, because it only gives the PostDominanceFrontier information of "fn", not the PostDominanceFrontier information of functions called by "f...

Hi, Chris I get a new PostDominanceFrontier class by combinating the code of PostDominanceSet/PostDominanceTree/PostDominanceFrontier FunctionPasses. It works very well. BTW: Why the PostDominanceFrontier FunctionPasses does not use the formal argument in runOnFunction(Function &)? Does it gets the Function from PassManager? Thank yo...

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Is there a reason this is better than the modified algorithm created > by Ferrante? > It looks like yours has as bad a worst case time bound in reality. > That is, the algorithm runs in O(sum of the size of all the dominance > frontiers). > > http://www.cs.rice.edu/~keith/Embed/dom.pdf >

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > As for a "better" way to implement PRE, it depends on what algorithm > you want to use. If you just want to write a PRE pass, that's easy > enough without dominance frontiers. > I simply want to write a PRE pass to get a better understanding of the transformation. Any tips on where to

Hi all, Does anyone know how to recreate the DominanceFronter and PostDominanceFrontier structures using the API of the latest release? To my knowledge, these are needed to implement a PRE pass (as done in the past<https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_13/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PRE.cpp>), but they were removed a while ago for efficiency reasons. Is there a better...

...egers) o. step 3 is nothing as normally a block only have two immediate succ. Again this algorithm is just random idea. It is at your own risk if you try it. On 11/1/13 9:18 PM, Christopher Wood wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anyone know how to recreate the DominanceFronter and > PostDominanceFrontier structures using the API of the latest release? > To my knowledge, these are needed to implement a PRE pass (as done in > the past > <https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_13/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PRE.cpp>), > but they were removed a while ago for efficiency re...

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Christopher Wood <christopherwood07 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >> >> As for a "better" way to implement PRE, it depends on what algorithm >> you want to use. If you just want to write a PRE pass, that's easy >> enough without dominance

...which can be > integrated somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? Yes and no. There's isn't a control dependence pass in LLVM per se, but I believe that is primarily because control dependence is very easy to compute with the existing analysis passes in LLVM. With PostDominanceFrontier, it was extremely simple (I think it was calling two methods in the PostDominanceFrontier pass). It might be slightly more work to compute it with PostDominatorTree, but not significantly. And, IIRC, you'll want to use PostDominatorTree instead of DominatorTree. For control dependence,...

...nothing as normally a block only have two immediate succ. > > Again this algorithm is just random idea. It is at your own risk if you > try it. > > On 11/1/13 9:18 PM, Christopher Wood wrote: > > Hi all, > > Does anyone know how to recreate the DominanceFronter and > PostDominanceFrontier structures using the API of the latest release? To my > knowledge, these are needed to implement a PRE pass (as done in the past), > but they were removed a while ago for efficiency reasons. Is there a better > way to implement PRE using the current API, or, alternatively, is there an &g...

Thank you John. Actually the opt tool (from LLVM 3.2 version) can generate the needed graphs (with pass "-domfrontier"). But I just want to surely know is there some pass or builder which can be integrated somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Control-Dependence-Graph-builder-tp56687p56689.html Sent

...f the names of member variables to distinguish them from local variables, etc. (Actually I'm not sure if the underscores go against LLVM coding standards, but it is certainly a different style than other LLVM code that I've seen.) 2) I did not implement the same interface as the llvm::PostDominanceFrontier. 3) My implementation uses a base node class wrapper which wraps basic blocks. I did that for 2 reasons. First, it makes it simple to reverse the CFG (control flow graph), so I can use the same algorithm/code used to compute the DF to also compute the PDF. (The PDF is the DF computed on t...

...somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? >> > > Yes and no. There's isn't a control dependence pass in LLVM per se, but I > believe that is primarily because control dependence is very easy to > compute with the existing analysis passes in LLVM. With > PostDominanceFrontier, it was extremely simple (I think it was calling two > methods in the PostDominanceFrontier pass). > > It might be slightly more work to compute it with PostDominatorTree, but > not significantly. And, IIRC, you'll want to use PostDominatorTree instead > of DominatorTree. For...

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > Please advise on how I should proceed. Even though, as I mentioned, the > code does not follow the LLVM coding standards and does not adhere to > the llvm::PostDominanceFrontier interface, I figured it would be better > to a working PDF than to not have it. Perhaps if you don't want to > insert it into the regular LLVM code base, you could put it into a project. It looks great, but unless the issues you mention are fixed, we really can't integrate it......

Hello All, I am interested in Control Dependence Graph building using the CFG and Dominance Frontier provided by corresponding passes. Just wandering whether LLVM provides some kind of pass or builder which will generate the Control Dependence Graph? Thanks, Arsen -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Control-Dependence-Graph-builder-tp56687.html Sent from the

...rote: > Hello All, > > I am interested in Control Dependence Graph building using the CFG and > Dominance Frontier provided by corresponding passes. Just wandering whether > LLVM provides some kind of pass or builder which will generate the Control > Dependence Graph? I think the PostDominanceFrontier analysis was removed from LLVM, but the PostDominatorTree analysis may help: http://llvm.org/doxygen/structllvm_1_1PostDominatorTree.html -- John T. > > Thanks, > Arsen > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Control-Dependence-Grap...