search for: visitaddrecexpr

...alarEvolutionExpressions.h:669: RetVal llvm::SCEVVisitor<SC, RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = llvm::SCEVExpander, RetVal = llvm::Value*]: Assertion `0 && "Invalid use of SCEVCouldNotCompute!"' failed. This happens in SCEVExpander::visitAddRecExpr where we drop down to this code: // If this is a chain of recurrences, turn it into a closed form, using the // folders, then expandCodeFor the closed form. This allows the folders to // simplify the expression without having to build a bunch of special code // into this folder. SCEVHan...

...: RetVal > llvm::SCEVVisitor<SC, > RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = > llvm::SCEVExpander, RetVal = llvm::Value*]: Assertion `0 && "Invalid use of > SCEVCouldNotCompute!"' failed. > > This happens in SCEVExpander::visitAddRecExpr where we drop down > to this code: > > // If this is a chain of recurrences, turn it into a closed form, using the > // folders, then expandCodeFor the closed form. This allows the folders to > // simplify the expression without having to build a bunch of special code >...

...SCEVVisitor<SC, > > RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = > > llvm::SCEVExpander, RetVal = llvm::Value*]: Assertion `0 && "Invalid use > > of SCEVCouldNotCompute!"' failed. > > > > This happens in SCEVExpander::visitAddRecExpr where we drop down > > to this code: > > > > // If this is a chain of recurrences, turn it into a closed form, using > > the // folders, then expandCodeFor the closed form. This allows the > > folders to // simplify the expression without having to build a bunch of...

..._sigtramp + 26 3 libLLVM-3.1svn.dylib 0x0000000103526810 llvm::SmallVectorTemplateCommon<llvm::SCEV const*>::operator[](unsigned int) + 128 4 LLVMPolly.dylib 0x0000000106867af8 SCEVAffinator::getLoopDepth(llvm::Loop const*) + 72 5 LLVMPolly.dylib 0x00000001068676c7 SCEVAffinator::visitAddRecExpr(llvm::SCEVAddRecExpr const*) + 247 6 LLVMPolly.dylib 0x000000010686710b llvm::SCEVVisitor<SCEVAffinator, isl_pw_aff*>::visit(llvm::SCEV const*) + 283 7 LLVMPolly.dylib 0x0000000106866f71 SCEVAffinator::visit(llvm::SCEV const*) + 449 8 LLVMPolly.dylib 0x000000010686766c SCEVA...

Perfect, thank you very much :) 2011/10/26 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>: > On 10/24/2011 11:32 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: >> >> Strange , with --enable-shared (I use auto tool by the way ...) it gives: >> >> MacBook-Pro-di-Marcello:examples Kariddi$ ./compile_ex.sh >> not_so_simple_loop >> clang (LLVM option parsing): Unknown command line

...Affine is actually of isl_aff type. Perhaps we could first commit a patch file to handle common cases, then we can considering submitting another patch file to handle general cases. >I think this is the right idea, but probably the wrong place to put it. >I would put this into SCEVValidator::visitAddRecExpr. This function >always adds the AddRecExpr itself as a parameter, whenever it is found >to be parametric. However, what we should do is to create a new ScevExpr >that starts at zero and is otherwise identical. We then add this as a >parameter. When doing this, we now also need to kee...

Hi Geoff, Firstly, I think it will be great if you have a small reproducer of this issue (which I can make fail after re-applying D18001 to ToT). > I’ve run into what appears to be a bug in ScalarEvolution, but I’m not sure > if it is instead caused by me missing an implicit assumption between LSR and > SCEV. > > This issue is caused by the change D18001, which is an attempt to

...if (i == e) { > + // Parameters.push_back(Parameter); > + ParameterIds[Parameter] = index; > + return; > + } > + } > + } I think this is the right idea, but probably the wrong place to put it. I would put this into SCEVValidator::visitAddRecExpr. This function always adds the AddRecExpr itself as a parameter, whenever it is found to be parametric. However, what we should do is to create a new ScevExpr that starts at zero and is otherwise identical. We then add this as a parameter. When doing this, we now also need to keep all the parame...

On 07/29/2013 09:15 AM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 07:37:14AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 07/29/2013 03:18 AM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 04:42:25PM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>>> Sven: In terms of making the behaviour of isl easier to understand, >>>> it may make sense to fail/assert in case

Hi Sebastian, Recently, I found the "Polly - Calculate dependences" pass would lead to significant compile-time overhead when compiling some loop-intensive source code. Tobias told me you found similar problem as follows: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14240 My evaluation shows that "Polly - Calculate dependences" pass consumes 96.4% of total compile-time overhead

...vn.dylib 0x0000000103526810 > llvm::SmallVectorTemplateCommon<llvm::SCEV > const*>::operator[](unsigned int) + 128 > 4  LLVMPolly.dylib      0x0000000106867af8 > SCEVAffinator::getLoopDepth(llvm::Loop const*) + 72 > 5  LLVMPolly.dylib      0x00000001068676c7 > SCEVAffinator::visitAddRecExpr(llvm::SCEVAddRecExpr const*) + 247 > 6  LLVMPolly.dylib      0x000000010686710b > llvm::SCEVVisitor<SCEVAffinator, isl_pw_aff*>::visit(llvm::SCEV > const*) + 283 > 7  LLVMPolly.dylib      0x0000000106866f71 > SCEVAffinator::visit(llvm::SCEV const*) + 449 > 8  LLVMPolly.dylib...

Hi All, I've run into what appears to be a bug in ScalarEvolution, but I'm not sure if it is instead caused by me missing an implicit assumption between LSR and SCEV. This issue is caused by the change D18001 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D18001> , which is an attempt to increase SCEV-inserted instruction re-use by picking a more canonical insertion position in the case where a new