search for: silken

Hi I have just written an pass which does some simple ASAP scheduling. First i registered it as optimization pass because it so nice documented and speeds up the compilation and testing times dramaticly :-). Then i just registered this part as an analysis part which should be used in a modified cbackend. All seems to work fine, exept that llc fails to link. I tried removing the

On Tue, 30 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > Everthing now compiles fine, but when running llc with invoking my own backend > derived from the cbackend i get the following error: > namespace llvm { > class MParSchedule : public BasicBlockPass { > public: > This pass has been tested as op...

On Fri, 12 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > To find the first instructions which are not depending on others results. So > far it seems to be working but i am missing instructions like: > %tmp.1 = seteq int %argc, 2 ; <bool> [#uses=1] > There seems only an function like llvm::Instruction::mayWrite...

Hi Chris and llvm list Thanks for your answer. > So again, this is the problem I described earlier: you have a pass > (MParSchedule) which is a basic block pass. This pass is being required > by another pass (your C backend-based thing) which is not a basic block > pass. This is the problem, please see the "how to write a pass" doc. The > fix is to change

Hi I am currently trying to schedule instructions with my own algorithm. For that i need to get the data dependency between the instructions. So currently i am dooing s.t. like: for(BasicBlock::iterator j=B.begin(),bbe=B.end();j!=bbe;++j) { InstructionList.push_back(j); if (const AllocaInst *AI = dyn_cast<AllocaInst>(j)) {

Hi Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2006 19:21 schrieb Chris Lattner: > On Tue, 30 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > > Everthing now compiles fine, but when running llc with invoking my own > > backend derived from the cbackend i get the following error: > > namespace llvm { > > class MParSchedule : public BasicBlockPass { > > public: > > &g...

Hi > One would expect this, its a facility of the C++ language. The anonymous > namespace is, essentially, the same as declaring everything in it > static. That is, the symbols are not exported and not available for > linking. Yes, it was pretty clear after finding out that this isn't a linking error which i suspected... > > So for all those trying to add an analysis path:

Hi I am currently investigating the possibility of implementing speex in hardware. So i would be very interested in an integer implementation of speex. The newest changelog entry had somthing about fixes of fixpoint but not much more information. A first glance at the source was not to enlightning so some hints would be really apreciated. Thanks st

...ce 2.0 on pci0 agp_i810_attach() called Attaching G33 Chip Type: 5, rid:10 agp0: detected 7676k stolen memory agp0: aperture size is 256M I tried running X and got this in dmesg.. agp0: trying to bind into stolen memory and this in the X log... (==) intel(0): Backing store disabled (==) intel(0): Silken mouse enabled (II) intel(0): Initializing HW Cursor (II) intel(0): xf86BindGARTMemory: bind key 6 at 0x006ff000 (pgoffset 1791) (WW) intel(0): xf86BindGARTMemory: binding of gart memory with key 6 at offset 0x6ff000 failed (Invalid argument) Fatal server error: Couldn't bind memory for...

Hi I have just taken a look at the LLVM-compiler and i am trying to write a pass which analyses the dataflow and sideeffects. So far i have written my own pass which works and i can traverse the blocks, functions and instructions. Currently i am using the "runOnFunction" function and iterate over the functions and blocks. But this seems to be not optimal since the instructions

On Tue, 23 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > I have just written an pass which does some simple ASAP scheduling. First i > registered it as optimization pass because it so nice documented and speeds > up the compilation and testing times dramaticly :-). Ok, so this is an LLVM->LLVM pass? > Then i just registere...

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: >> Right it does. However, does something *else* require MParSchedule? If >> so, what? > Ok, i am writing on a different backend based on the cbackend. Ok. > The test usage of this pass looks like this: > > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const...

Hi This may sound like a stupid question, but well i am not very good with the automake tools: How do i enable debug mode in llvm-1.7? I tried ./configure --enable-debug-runtime editing Makefile.config DEBUG_RUNTIME=1 editing Makefile.config.in DEBUG_RUNTIME=1 and ./configure --enable-debug-runtime Currently i managed to make a profile build but gdb just chokes like this when trying to debug:

On Wed, 31 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: >> that requires a BasicBlockPass, it will fail the same was as when a >> ModulePass requires a FunctionPass. > void MParSchedule::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { > AU.setPreservesAll(); > } > > MParSchedule requires nothing and changes...

Hi Chris and list Thanks for your quick answer :-). Am Freitag, 12. Mai 2006 19:09 schrieb Chris Lattner: > On Fri, 12 May 2006, Silken Tiger wrote: > > To find the first instructions which are not depending on others results. > > So far it seems to be working but i am missing instructions like: > > %tmp.1 = seteq int %argc, 2 ; <bool> [#uses=1] > > There seems only an function like llvm::I...

...NVIDIA(0): Initialized GPU GART. (II) NVIDIA(0): Setting mode "1920x1200+0+0" (II) Loading extension NV-GLX (II) NVIDIA(0): NVIDIA 3D Acceleration Architecture Initialized (II) NVIDIA(0): Using the NVIDIA 2D acceleration architecture (==) NVIDIA(0): Backing store disabled (==) NVIDIA(0): Silken mouse enabled (II) Loading extension NV-CONTROL (==) RandR enabled (II) Setting vga for screen 0. (II) Initializing built-in extension MIT-SHM (II) Initializing built-in extension XInputExtension (II) Initializing built-in extension XTEST (II) Initializing built-in extension XKEYBOARD (II) Initiali...

...perations: [ 304.310] (II) Solid [ 304.310] (II) Copy [ 304.310] (II) Composite (RENDER acceleration) [ 304.310] (II) UploadToScreen [ 304.310] (II) DownloadFromScreen [ 304.310] (==) NOUVEAU(0): Backing store enabled [ 304.310] (==) NOUVEAU(0): Silken mouse disabled [ 304.310] (II) NOUVEAU(0): [XvMC] Associated with Nouveau GeForce 8/9 Textured Video. [ 304.310] (II) NOUVEAU(0): [XvMC] Extension initialized. [ 304.310] (==) NOUVEAU(0): DPMS enabled [..] > If all else fails, just remove nouveau_dri.so and/or boot with > nouveau.noacc...

On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 14:48 +0200, Silken Tiger wrote: > Hi > > Thanks for all your feedback. I just found the reason for the compile failure > for my analysis pass: I had to add my object to the namespace llvm instead of > anonymous. This took me some time since i was looking for an linking > failure... but as errors...

Hi > Right it does. However, does something *else* require MParSchedule? If > so, what? Ok, i am writing on a different backend based on the cbackend. The test usage of this pass looks like this: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>(); AU.addRequired<MParSchedule>(); AU.setPreservesAll(); } and then in the

Hi Thanks for all your feedback. I just found the reason for the compile failure for my analysis pass: I had to add my object to the namespace llvm instead of anonymous. This took me some time since i was looking for an linking failure... but as errors go i should have looked at the error message a little closer. So for all those trying to add an analysis path: * add the object name to the