search for: tsharma

...ction, llvm::Function, llvm::ilist_traits<llvm::BasicBlock> >::getNext(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x11)[0x83d36c5] > opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++()+0x17)[0x83d011d] > opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++(int)+0x1c)[0x849c64e] > /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so((anonymous namespace)::Hello::PlaceBlocks(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x196)[0x115616] > /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so((anonymous namespace)::Hello::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&)+0x68)[0x115450] > opt(llvm::PassManagerTraits<llvm::Function&gt...

...block), and then iterate through the list of basicblocks , picking up block with position equal to that of the random number and place it into the current InsertPos and increment InsertPos. Running it like this: ------------------------------------------------------------------- opt -load /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello <helloprog.bc> /dev/null --------------------------------------------------------------------- I wish to make it more sophisticated but initially was trying to see whether a simple modification to BasicBlockPlacement works or not. Also when I try to...

...lock, llvm::Function, llvm::Function, llvm::ilist_traits<llvm::BasicBlock> >::getNext(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x11)[0x83d36c5] opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++()+0x17)[0x83d011d] opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++(int)+0x1c)[0x849c64e] /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so((anonymous namespace)::Hello::PlaceBlocks(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x196)[0x115616] /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so((anonymous namespace)::Hello::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&)+0x68)[0x115450] opt(llvm::PassManagerTraits<llvm::Function>::runPass...

>> Is attached patch acceptable? > > Looks great, applied, thanks! > http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20050131/023931.html Thanks! >> Also I have in Makefile.rules (but not include in patch) some >> modification for simplify used common Makefile.rules in LLVM projects and >> non-LLVM project (guarding some LLVM specific parts by ifdef

...bc files (?)which I need for my experimentation.Any other significant modification/addition missing ?? 2) Using llvm-test : I get this error after a long time when it enters into Spec directory. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- `/home/tsharma/llvm-cvs/llvm/projects/llvm-test/External/SPEC/CFP2000' > gmake[4]: Entering directory > `/home/tsharma/llvm-cvs/llvm/projects/llvm-test/External/SPEC/CFP2000/177.mesa' > gmake[4]: *** No rule to make target `Output/accum.rbc', needed by > `Output/177.mesa.linked.rbc'....

This is exactly what i m trying : opt -load /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello <helloprog.bc> /dev/null Tanu Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I wrote a pass which randomizes basic blocks and insert new block.But > when i run another pass over it which simply lis...

On Mon, 30 May 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I have been trying to compile the SPEC benchmark but have failed even > after several attempts.The first error I get while trying to run is : There are two ways to do this: 1. Use the llvm-test harness 2. Use the official spec harness with -Wl,-native-cbe or -Wl,-native flags to llvm-gcc. -Chris >

Hello, I have been trying to compile the SPEC benchmark but have failed even after several attempts.The first error I get while trying to run is : -------------------------------------------------------------------- Error loading program '../00000002/gzip_base.x86_linux.bc': Can't open file: ../00000002/gzip_base.x86_linux.bc

...t - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20041130/87614d2d/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Tanu Sharma <tsharma at unity.ncsu.edu> Subject: no subject Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:44:45 -0500 (EST) Size: 1934 URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20041130/87614d2d/attachment.mht>

OOps.. I overlooked :-) Thanks Tanu Misha Brukman <brukman at uiuc.edu> wrote: On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:18:33PM -0800, Tanu Sharma wrote: > This is exactly what i m trying : > > opt -load /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello /dev/null Well, you're not saving the output of your pass, it's going to /dev/null. Try: opt -load ... < input.bc > output.bc And then look at how output differs from input. -- Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.ui...

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > > I have a doubt. > > This is an excerpt of the raw report I get after running Spec benchmarks > through llvm-test.I am trying to calculate the program execution > time.Does the output result in bold corresponds to "lli time" in > Makefile.spec ? I am not interested in llc, jit or cbe.I simply need the > normal

I have a doubt. This is an excerpt of the raw report I get after running Spec benchmarks through llvm-test.I am trying to calculate the program execution time.Does the output result in bold corresponds to "lli time" in Makefile.spec ? I am not interested in llc, jit or cbe.I simply need the normal bytecode and native code execution times after running my pass over them.I have modified