search for: valuehandles

Hi, I would like to start a new porting of GlobalIsel for RISCV. An initial patch about GlobalIsel infrastructure for RISCV was ready now: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65219 There is another porting patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D41653 posted by Leslie Zhai at the end of 2017. I have checked with Leslie about the status of this patch.He has stopped developing it since some questions need be

Greetings folks, As I'm working on refactoring the AA interfaces in LLVM to prepare for the new pass manager, I keep hitting issues. Some of the complexity that is hitting this stems from the update API, which consists of three virtual functions: deleteValue(Value *V) copyValue(Value *From, Value *To) addEscapingUse(Use &U) These interfaces are *very* rarely called. Here are the only

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Daniel Berlin" <dannyb at google.com> > Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2015 3:14:38 PM > Subject: Re: AliasAnalysis update interface - a tale

Hi, While audit our code, we found out a strange pattern in one of the LLVM headers and we were wondering if that was expected or if it should be fixed. Namely the problem looks like this: #ifndef NDEBUG // Define some variable. #endif assert(/*use this variable, i.e., outside of the ifndef NDEBUG scope*/); This happens in include/llvm/IR/ValueHandle.h for the variable Poisoned line 494

...e necessary. We may just not in practice see these issues, and I don't really want to perturb the LTO generated code quality for a hypothetical issue until we actually have the tools in place to handle things reasonably. So my plan is: 1) Fix obvious issues with GloblasModRef and switch it to ValueHandles 2) Mail out a patch to disable this part of GlobalsModRef. I can put it behind a flag or however folks would like it to work. 3) Remove addEscapingUse() update API, which without #2 may regress some LTO test case I don't have (because I don't have any other than bootstrap) Thoughts? -Chand...

Hi, On 02/10/2016 01:23 AM, haicheng at codeaurora.org wrote: > Thank you, Mikael. I can reproduce what you saw and am looking into it. Great! > Just curious, why do you run loop-deletion before licm and loop-idiom? As part of our internal testing we use Csmith to generate C-programs and then we run the compiler with random generated compiler flags on that input. This bug was

I'm have a [PATCH] isDereferenceablePointer: look through gc.relocates and I want to know how to test this patch. So far, I've found one candiate: speculative execution in SimplifyCFG (test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/SpeculativeExec.ll). However, it's somewhat involved to show that SimplifyCFG does kick in for gc.relocate. Is there a better way to directly test it? Signed-off-by:

Good point, I forgot to check the standard. Given the clang was failing I assumed the code was wrong x). I am guessing there is something weird with the project, because indeed, paragraph 7.2 of the standard says: The assert macro is redefined according to the current state of NDEBUG each time that <assert.h> is included. > On Oct 4, 2017, at 2:53 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at

This question came about through reviewing work from Leslie Zhai on GlobalISel support for RISC-V, which also motivated me to revisit code which I've always felt was a bit clunky. Calling convention lowering in LLVM is typically handled by functions conforming to the CCAssignFn typedef: typedef bool CCAssignFn(unsigned ValNo, MVT ValVT, MVT LocVT,

Hi Hal, On 1/16/19 6:59 PM, Dmitriev, Serguei N via llvm-dev wrote: Hi all, We have recently encountered a problem with AssumptionCache that it does not get updated when a block with llvm.assume calls gets outlined by the CodeExtractor. As a result we end up with stale references to the llvm.assume calls that were moved to the outlined function in the parent function's cache. The problem

Philip Reames wrote: > T.M.K., there's no direct way to test it. There is. See the 'unittests/' directory which contains the C++ unit tests. See unittests/IR/UserTest.cpp for an example that builds up IR from a .ll-in-a-C-string then queries C++ API operations on it. Nick You have to construct a > transformation which happens with the information you added and not >

...y passes that would be affected and we > could "easily" make this happen. Hide the constructors and destructors > so that only the friend API can access it. Right, this is what MLIR does. However, keep in mind that this is just one piece of the puzzle. You also have things like ValueHandles which get owned by IPA passes. The CallGraph used by the inline persists across function pass manager runs, and needs to be correctly updatable in order to run CallGraphSCC passes. Getting to a multithread clean optimizer is not one bug fix away - this is a multiyear journey, and I would prefer n...

Hi all, We have recently encountered a problem with AssumptionCache that it does not get updated when a block with llvm.assume calls gets outlined by the CodeExtractor. As a result we end up with stale references to the llvm.assume calls that were moved to the outlined function in the parent function's cache. The problem can be reproduced on the attached file as follows (many thanks to Andy

Hi LLVM developers, Don't be quiet :) we need your suggestions for supporting custom CCState, CCAssignFn in D41700. And also RegisterBank in D41653. because it needs to consider about how to support variable-sized register classes concept implemented in D24631. And I think you might have same question when porting to GlobalISel for your Targets, so please give us some directions, thanks

...of GloblasModRef. > > Ok, but we need performance information to make sure this doesn’t > cause a regression in practice for LTO builds. For example, Spec 2K > and 2K6 are a reasonable place to start. > > > 1) Fix obvious issues with GloblasModRef and switch it to > > ValueHandles > > 2) Mail out a patch to disable this part of GlobalsModRef. I can > > put it behind a flag or however folks would like it to work. > > 3) Remove addEscapingUse() update API, which without #2 may regress > > some LTO test case I don't have (because I don't have any...

On 4 January 2018 at 17:10, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> On 3 Jan 2018, at 14:00, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I haven't dug into the GlobalISel calling convention code much but I can comment on the MipsCCState. Thanks for the insight Daniel, much appreciated. >> * MipsCCState: adds bool

> On 4 Jan 2018, at 10:51, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > > On 4 January 2018 at 17:10, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> On 3 Jan 2018, at 14:00, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> I haven't dug into the GlobalISel calling convention code much but I can comment on the

Dear All, The LLVM 2.6 Release Branch doesn't compile for me on Mac OS X. The following patch seems to fix it (it adds a missing include file to get WeakVH defined). Has anyone else seen this breakage, or is it possible that I've got the wrong branch checked out? -- John T. Index: lib/Transforms/Scalar/DeadStoreElimination.cpp

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > On Feb 28, 2010, at 11:11 AM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Given an instruction ptr instr, and a Function ptr func, >> can I simply check if func == instr->get_parent()->get_parent() to see if >> this instruction is still in this Function? >> > Yup! Well.

...d assertingVHs should be dropped by now. if (V->HasValueHandle) { #ifndef NDEBUG // Only in +Asserts mode... dbgs() << "While deleting: " << *V->getType() << " %" << V->getNameStr() << "\n"; if (pImpl->ValueHandles[V]->getKind() == Assert) llvm_unreachable("An asserting value handle still pointed to this " value!"); #endif llvm_unreachable("All references to V were not removed?"); } Yours sincerely, Kadysev Mikhail 22.04.2012, в 1:41, Dmitry N....