Displaying 20 results from an estimated 42 matches for "raiseallocations".
2009 Apr 28
3
[LLVMdev] O3 passes
Can I specify passes that I want run directly to llvm-gcc? I don't want
all of -O3, for example. I tried llvm-gcc -raiseallocs ..., but that
didn't work. I also tried running cc1 directly and it didn't take
-raiseallocs as a parameter either.
Duncan Sands wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 April 2009 04:02:47 am Ryan M. Lefever wrote:
>> I assume that when -O3 (or O2 or O1) is
2009 Oct 24
1
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] remove usage of RaiseAllocations pass from llvm-gcc
After LLVM rev 84987, the RaiseAllocations pass no longer exists.
llvm-gcc needs to be patched:
Index: gcc/llvm-linker-hack.cpp
===================================================================
--- gcc/llvm-linker-hack.cpp (revision 84984)
+++ gcc/llvm-linker-hack.cpp (working copy)
@@ -80,7 +80,6 @@
llvm::createJumpThreadingPass();...
2009 Apr 28
1
[LLVMdev] O3 passes
Thanks for the help. When I run the following (where $llvm is the path
to my llvm installation):
$llvm/bin/llvm-gcc -c -o - -O1 tmp.c -emit-llvm -mllvm
--disable-llvm-optzns | $llvm/bin/opt -raiseallocs
I get the following error:
cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-fdisable-llvm-optzns"
I am running llvm 2.5. I performed a
$llvm/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.1/cc1
2009 Apr 28
0
[LLVMdev] O3 passes
On Tuesday 28 April 2009 09:19:19 am Ryan M. Lefever wrote:
> Can I specify passes that I want run directly to llvm-gcc? I don't want
> all of -O3, for example. I tried llvm-gcc -raiseallocs ..., but that
> didn't work. I also tried running cc1 directly and it didn't take
> -raiseallocs as a parameter either.
You are better off run passes explicitly using opt. Try
2007 Oct 27
3
[LLVMdev] malloc() vs. MallocInst
Hi,
I recently looked quite some time for why poolalloc wouldn't transform calls
to malloc() in my program, until I noticed that it handles calls to malloc()
(eg, stdlib pass) -- but only transforms MallocInst's.
Is there a general policy on how passes should behave? Should they handle both
representations, is doing -raiseallocs the preferred way, or do we
explicitely not want any
2009 Apr 28
3
[LLVMdev] O3 passes
I assume that when -O3 (or O2 or O1) is passed to llvm-gcc, then it
utilizes opt. How do I determine what passes opt runs? How do I
determine what external tools (and arguments) llvm-gcc is invoking?
Regards,
Ryan
2009 Apr 28
0
[LLVMdev] O3 passes
On Tuesday 28 April 2009 04:02:47 am Ryan M. Lefever wrote:
> I assume that when -O3 (or O2 or O1) is passed to llvm-gcc, then it
> utilizes opt. How do I determine what passes opt runs? How do I
> determine what external tools (and arguments) llvm-gcc is invoking?
It doesn't invoke opt, it runs the passes directly. You can see
what passes it is running by passing
2004 Mar 23
1
[LLVMdev] malloc instruction
Hi,
I'm currently implementing some optimization passes for LLVM and I
came across a problem. I'm new to LLVM so if this question has been
asked before please kindly tell me where can I find the answer.
There are 2 types of AllocationInst - Alloca and Malloc. But most of
the time from the compiled byte code I can only find the Alloca
statement (actually I never come across a
2008 Jun 20
1
[LLVMdev] libc malloc vs. llvm::MallocInst
Hello,
have a short look at the following simple c-prog:
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
void* buf = malloc(10 * sizeof(char*));
/* do sth with buf, so that it is not "optimized away" */
return 0;
}
When you compile this using a plain llvm-gcc, the call to libc-malloc is
left inside.But compiling it with -O2 alters the call to llvm::MallocInst.
Now
2008 Nov 19
2
[LLVMdev] poolallocation error
Hi,
I am trying to use the poolallocator. More specific, I am trying to
play around with the pointer compression pass. Though, I get assertion
failures for the pass dependencies.
This is when it in PointerCompress::getAnalysisUsage tries to register
the the BU pass as required. I.e. when
AU.addRequired<CompleteBUDataStructures>(); is called.
$ opt -f -load
2009 Feb 02
1
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Debug information improvement - keep the line number with optimizations
Hi,
I've been thinking about how to keep the line number with the llvm
transform/Analysis passes.
Basically, I agree with Chris's notes (
http://www.nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/DebugInfoImprovements.txt), and I
will follow his way to turn on the line number information when optimization
enabled.
Here is a detailed proposal:
1. Introduction
At the time of this writing, LLVM's
2007 Oct 29
0
[LLVMdev] malloc() vs. MallocInst
Torvald,
For what are you interested in poolalloc? I'm asking because we are
trying to decide how to prioritize work on it. Thanks,
--Vikram
http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~vadve
http://llvm.org
On Oct 27, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently looked quite some time for why poolalloc wouldn't
> transform calls
> to malloc() in my program, until I
2008 Dec 04
0
[LLVMdev] 32bit math being promoted to 64 bit
instcombine doesn't seem to be doing it. From my testing it seems to
only occur when I use -indvars after a long string of commands.
For example:
llvm-as < test_fc_27.ll | opt -preverify -domtree -verify
-lowersetjmp -raiseallocs -simplifycfg -domtree -domfrontier
-mem2reg -globalopt -globaldce -ipconstprop -deadargelim
-instcombine -simplifycfg -ba
siccg -prune-eh -inline
2008 Dec 04
2
[LLVMdev] 32bit math being promoted to 64 bit
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 8:58 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote:
>
> What optimization pass promotes 32 bit math operations to 64 bit operations
> so I can disable it? I have code that works fine with optimizations turned
> off but fails with it turned on because of this stage.
>
>
> Do you have a
2009 Jan 16
1
[LLVMdev] poolallocation error
Hi all,
I too am getting this error for x86_64 when I am trying to use the
Data Structure Analysis ...I svn upped both the llvm main branch and
the poolalloc today in the morning and recompiled everything from
scratch :
$ opt -load /home/pprabhu/llvm/llvm-install-x86-64/lib/libpoolalloc.so
-ds-aa < o.bc
opt: /home/pprabhu/llvm/llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:1418: virtual
void
2007 Oct 29
1
[LLVMdev] malloc() vs. MallocInst
Hi Vikram,
I want to use poolalloc as a means for partitioning memory in Software
Transactional Memory. We will have a paper about tuning parameters in
word-based STMs in PPoPP 08, but there we use one configuration for the
complete TM, which obviously has limitations in heterogenous workloads.
Partitioning with poolalloc should give me (1) hopefully meaningful partitions
(ie,
2007 Jul 15
3
[LLVMdev] Floating point constants (bug?)
>From the language guide:
"The one non-intuitive notation for constants is the optional
hexadecimal form of floating point constants. For example, the form
'double 0x432ff973cafa8000' is equivalent to (but harder to read than)
'double 4.5e+15'. The only time hexadecimal floating point constants
are required (and the only time that they are generated by the
disassembler) is
2009 Jan 19
0
[LLVMdev] poolallocation error
Dear Prakash,
Yes, DSA is still in active use, although nobody else uses the -ds-aa pass as far as I know.
I tried the below sample (although ds-aa should be in libLLVMDataStructure.so and not libpoolalloc.so), and I get the same error. I've seen similar problems with other passes in our work here. My guess is that -ds-aa is requiring two passes that claim to invalidate each other; this
2009 Jan 21
1
[LLVMdev] poolallocation error
Dear Prakash,
I believe I've fixed the problem you were having with ds-aa. Please
update your poolalloc tree, recompile, and let me know if it works.
-- John T.
Criswell, John T wrote:
> [snip]
>
> ________________________________________
> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Prakash Prabhu [prakash.prabhu at gmail.com]
> Sent:
2010 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] Cross-module function inlining
I've developed a working LLVM back-end (based on LLVM 2.6) for a custom architecture with its own tool chain. This tool chain creates stand-alone programs from a single assembly. We used to use GCC, which supported producing a single machine assembly from multiple source files.
I modified Clang to accept the architecture, but discovered that clang-cc (or the Clang Tool subclass inside Clang)