search for: promotememtoreg

...lier). > Alternatively, if you don't want to do that, you can build mem2reg into > your pass if it works better. To do this, your pass needs to > 'addRequired' DominatorTree and DominatorFrontier, then use the > interfaces exposed through > include/llvm/Transforms/Utils/PromoteMemToReg.h. This still leaves the question of TargetData parameter -- which is not used by the PromoteMemToReg function, AFAICT. Passing *(TargetData*)0 is dirty. - Volodya

Just shows me what I expect void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); So I'm only using it for DominatorTree(so I can use PromoteMemToReg). Thanks On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote: >> >> Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion >> failed: (ResultPass&&  "getAnalysis*() called on an ana...

...tively, if you don't want to do that, you can build mem2reg into > > your pass if it works better. To do this, your pass needs to > > 'addRequired' DominatorTree and DominatorFrontier, then use the > > interfaces exposed through > > include/llvm/Transforms/Utils/PromoteMemToReg.h. > > This still leaves the question of TargetData parameter -- which is not used by > the PromoteMemToReg function, AFAICT. Passing *(TargetData*)0 is dirty. Just addRequired<TargetData>(), and pass in getAnalysis<TargetData>() as appropriate. -Chris -- http://llvm.org/ h...

I still have the addRequired: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); } The other line DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Michael Ilseman <michael at lunarg.com> wrote: > Something's different here, earlier in the thread you said you had: > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { >                AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); > } > Now you...

...he addRequired: > virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const { > AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); > } > > The other line > DominatorTree *dt =&getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); > Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg Isn't DominatorTree a FunctionPass? If your pass is a ModulePass, you need to pass a Function * or Function & to getAnalysis<>(): getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(F) -- John T. > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Michael Ilseman<michael at lunarg.com> wrote: >&gt...

...but I'm having some problems with the llvm codebase. I have two questions: (1) Is there any way to clone a DominatorTree or DominanceFrontier object, so that I can modify the cloned copy? It looks like Pass makes the copy constructor private... (2) Is there any reason why functions (such as PromoteMemToReg) accept parameters of types DominatorTree and DominanceFrontier instead of types DominatorTreeBase and DominanceFrontierBase? It seems to me that they should accept the abstract interface instead of the implementation (and avoid the extra baggage of a pass). Having said that, I'm willing to h...

...39;opt -yourpass -mem2reg'? Alternatively, if you don't want to do that, you can build mem2reg into your pass if it works better. To do this, your pass needs to 'addRequired' DominatorTree and DominatorFrontier, then use the interfaces exposed through include/llvm/Transforms/Utils/PromoteMemToReg.h. -Chris > use PassManager. Here's the code I ended up with: > > bool runOnFunction(llvm::Function& m) > { > visit(m); > > ExistingModuleProvider mp(m.getParent()); > FunctionPassManager pm(&mp); >...

...ual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const { >>                        AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); >>         } >> >> The other line >>         DominatorTree *dt =&getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); >> Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg > > Isn't DominatorTree a FunctionPass?  If your pass is a ModulePass, you need > to pass a Function * or Function & to getAnalysis<>(): > > getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(F) > > -- John T. > >> >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Michael Ilseman&l...

Hello, in the implementation of some analysis, I need to change the program and then invoke Mem2Reg pass. That pass, in turn, requires other analysis, so I must use PassManager. Here's the code I ended up with: bool runOnFunction(llvm::Function& m) { visit(m); ExistingModuleProvider mp(m.getParent());

...:50 PM, ret val <retval386 at gmail.com> wrote: > Just shows me what I expect > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { > DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); > > So I'm only using it for DominatorTree(so I can use PromoteMemToReg). > > Thanks > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote: > >> > >> Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion > >> failed: (ResultPass&&...

I'm writing a Pass that I would like to remain loadable by opt. The pass also requires DominatorTree(for PromoteMemToReg). Looking for examples the only way I found to require a dependecny is by doing something like this: char Hello::ID = 0; namespace llvm { void initializeHelloPass(llvm::PassRegistry&); } INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(Hello, "hello", "Hello World Pass", false...

...'m not supposed to reply to all. Are you saying all PHI nodes are required to include all its predecessor blocks no matter they have input or not? What about successor blocks? Are they optional if they don't provide inputs? BTW, where should I look at to verify this, the mem2reg.cpp & PromoteMemToReg.cpp? Thanks a lot. On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Caldarale, Charles R < Chuck.Caldarale at unisys.com> wrote: > > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > > On Behalf Of Wei Dang > > Subject: [LLVMdev] Question about method > Code...

...round loads and stores? > I > fully understand the design goal to arbitrarily reorder other passes but > for > mem2reg it actually seems vital to run it as the first pass to make all > other passes useful. In addition to the mem2reg pass, the underlying logic is also exposed via the PromoteMemToReg utility routine, for use in other passes. In the same way that mem2reg frees front-ends from having to compute SSA form, PromoteMemToReg can be used by transformation passes that wish to insert or modify code without having to jump through SSA hoops themselves. An example of a pass that uses mem2re...

On 11/08/2011 08:50 PM, ret val wrote: > Just shows me what I expect > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const { > DominatorTree *dt =&getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); > > So I'm only using it for DominatorTree(so I can use PromoteMemToReg). Interesting. Is the same assert triggered when you use RegisterPass to register the pass? Is getAnalysisUsage() called at all? My definition of getAnalysisUsage looks like: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const ^^^^^^^ Why do you omit the 'virtual'? Cheers Tobi

...he Mem2Reg pass on a function without using the the LLVM opt utility. I wrote some code, which I am not sure is correct: TS_ASSERT(!verifyFunction(*function)); // find the dominance frontier of the CFG DominanceFrontier DF; DF.runOnFunction(*function); // try to promote stack allocated variables PromoteMemToReg(function->getRegAllocas(), DF, *tgt_data); function->print(std::cout); TS_ASSERT(!verifyFunction(*function)); Is this supposed to work? Or what is the preferred way passes are to be run on functions? With the above code, my program crashes even before main(), when doing some static initial...

...39;t want to do that, you can build mem2reg into > > > your pass if it works better. To do this, your pass needs to > > > 'addRequired' DominatorTree and DominatorFrontier, then use the > > > interfaces exposed through > > > include/llvm/Transforms/Utils/PromoteMemToReg.h. > > > > This still leaves the question of TargetData parameter -- which is not > > used by the PromoteMemToReg function, AFAICT. Passing *(TargetData*)0 is > > dirty. > > Just addRequired<TargetData>(), and pass in getAnalysis<TargetData>() as > appro...

...9;t provide inputs? The question doesn't make sense; we're only concerned with the predecessors here. If you have a loop, some successor (possibly the block of interest) is also a predecessor and must conform to SSA usage. > where should I look at to verify this, the mem2reg.cpp & PromoteMemToReg.cpp? It's an inherent characteristic of SSA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_single_assignment_form (or any of numerous textbooks and papers). - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient....

On 11/08/2011 03:20 AM, ret val wrote: > I'm writing a Pass that I would like to remain loadable by opt. The > pass also requires DominatorTree(for PromoteMemToReg). > > Looking for examples the only way I found to require a dependecny is > by doing something like this: > char Hello::ID = 0; > namespace llvm { void initializeHelloPass(llvm::PassRegistry&); } > INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(Hello, "hello", &qu...

Hi, I've been writing some optimization passes for LLVM and had good luck with the simple stuff, but I am running into all kinds of trouble trying to make copies of variables within a BasicBlock as part of a LoopPass I am trying to make copies of the variables that are in scope in the loop body like so: //Remove the existing terminator

...6-->391 of PromoteMemoryToRegister.cpp when in the control flow of -scalarrepl: #4 0x08764f72 in (anonymous namespace)::PromoteMem2Reg::run (this=0xbff9bfa0) at /home/bram/workspace/svn/aspicere2/trunk/llvm/lib/Transforms/ Utils/PromoteMemoryToRegister.cpp:271 #5 0x08767021 in llvm::PromoteMemToReg (Allocas=@0xbff9c120, ET=@0x8b14c10, DF=@0x8b14d98, AST=0x0) at /home/bram/workspace/svn/aspicere2/trunk/llvm/lib/Transforms/ Utils/PromoteMemoryToRegister.cpp:812 #6 0x08744713 in (anonymous namespace)::SROA::performPromotion (this=0x8b14f38, F=@0x8bc8468) at /home/bram/workspace/s...