similar to: A bug in DependenceAnalysis?

Hi Philip, Thanks for checking! I'm running my own Foo pass that registers DependenceAnalysisWrapperPass as a prerequisite and then I run it like so: opt -load libfoo.so -foo example.bc This is LLVM 3.9. Cheers, - Stan On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stan, > > in both cases I get a consistent anti result. Can you

Hi Philip, I forgot to mention that I was ignoring loop-independent dependences. If I don't I get an inconsistent, ordered, anti, loop-independent dependence and an inconsistent, ordered, flow, loop-carried dependence for example A. At the same time I get just a consistent, ordered, anti, loop-independent dependence for example B. Here's the .ll code for example A: *; Function Attrs:

Oh, I see, that makes a lot of sense. How do I build the pass pipeline? On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Feb 11, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Stanislav Manilov via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I am used to specifying dependence on other LLVM passes in the >

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Stanislav Manilov < stanislav.manilov at gmail.com> wrote: > As in "look at the source of clang" or as in "look at the -S -emit-llvm" > output? If you mean the former, then would that be easy for someone who > hasn't seen the clang source before? > Generally the latter - then potentially set some breakpoints & look at

The usual advice I provide people is "see what Clang does with an equivalent C construct" On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Stanislav Manilov < stanislav.manilov at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > There is another benefit to keeping the CppBackend: it's great for > learning how to use the IR and the C++ API in particular, as can be seen > from this SO Q&A: >

On 26 September 2013 17:52, Stanislav Manilov <stanislav.manilov at gmail.com>wrote: > To answer your question I am testing on a pandaboard currently, which has > an arm cortex-a9 processor, which I think is 64-bit. > Cortex-A9 is still 32-bits, so you'll have all support you need. ;) however it doesn't if I remove the -ffreestanding flag. I need to figure > this out

Hello Renato, It turned out I just didn't do the cross-compilation correctly, and Tim Northover already pointed me to a guide you have written on it ( http://clang.llvm.org/docs/CrossCompilation.html), so I will read that before continuing with my efforts. To answer your question I am testing on a pandaboard currently, which has an arm cortex-a9 processor, which I think is 64-bit. I am much

Hello, I am used to specifying dependence on other LLVM passes in the `getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &)` method of my pass. However, it doesn't seem that there is a header file that exposes the `mem2reg` pass - it is implemented in `Mem2Reg.cpp` as a wrapper. Is there an easy way to reuse this pass, or should I, in essence, duplicate `Mem2Reg.cpp` in my project? Cheers, - Stan

Hello, I was trying to compile a simple program with the CppBackend like so: $ clang str_arg.c -emit-llvm -S $ llc -march=cpp str_arg.ll It produces a file `str_arg.cpp` as expected, however it doesn't seem that the resulting file is correct. For once, it includes `<llvm/Analysis/Verifier.h>` which seems to have been moved to `llvm/IR/Verifier.h` as far back as 2013. My question is

Hello LLVM Devs, Thanks for helping me previously to cross-compile for ARM, I managed to get a working toolchain and am currently having fun compiling different toy problems and running them on a pandaboard. As part of my research I am trying to implement the ARM NEON Intrinsics in the PowerPC LLVM backend. I am still at the beginning of my efforts and am not yet familiar with either the ARM or

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> > To: "preston briggs" <preston.briggs at gmail.com> > Cc: "Benjamin Kramer" <benny.kra at gmail.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 12:56:53 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]

Hi there, I've been playing with some benchmarks for a while, but I'm stuck with a very specific issue, that, I guess, must be some kind of bug. Well, I wrote a pass that simply counts how many combinations of memory accesses (only stores and loads, on a given loop) has any dependence between them. Curiously, I didn't have any problems until I tried it out on one of the loops in the

Hello Hal, I am not very familiar with the DSP capabilities of PowerPC, but I imagine there will be instructions for simple vector operations like vector addition, multiplication, etc. so for these I imagine the implementation would consist of just outputting the correct instruction. However, for NEON instructions like the reciprocal step (see

On 11/02/2012 10:21 AM, Preston Briggs wrote: > > My initial guess is that a conservative fix is quick and small (make > sure the underlying pointers are loop invariant, otherwise give up). A > better approach would be to somehow turn code like the example into > array references that can be analyzed. I'll need to think about this and > do some reading. Hi Preston, I looked

Hi Chandler, Thanks for writing. Could you give me some C (or C++) for an illustrative example. I think I understand your concern, but I'd like to be sure. Thanks, Preston -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121102/88c02212/attachment.html>

On 02.11.2012, at 15:53, Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Chandler, > > Thanks for writing. > Could you give me some C (or C++) for an illustrative example. > I think I understand your concern, but I'd like to be sure. Hi Preston, The bug report at http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14241 has more details, including a C++ test case. - Ben

I see, thanks Ben. So yes, I certainly misunderstood (more likely "misunderstand") how things work. My initial guess is that a conservative fix is quick and small (make sure the underlying pointers are loop invariant, otherwise give up). A better approach would be to somehow turn code like the example into array references that can be analyzed. I'll need to think about this and do

Hi, I want to create a copy of DependenceAnalysis downstream. At first I tried the HelloWorld tutorial. But then I figured, maybe I should move on to create my pass by mimicking some other pass in LLVM. So, I tried copying DependenceAnalysis itself [1] Although after a lot of time of trying it compiled, I'm pretty sure I have done it completely in the wrong way. What is more, I can't

Hi I want to analyse the memory dependencies which exist in a loop at an intra iteration as well as inter iteration (loop carried dependencies). I looked at the DependenceAnalysis implementation which returns a lot of the information I require (based on a prior AliasAnalysis pass), however I need to pass the Src and Dst instructions in program order. I was wondering how I can collect all the

Here's the current code (abstracted a bit) const Instruction *Src, const Instruction *Dst, // make sure they are loads and stores, then const Value *SrcPtr = getPointerOperand(Src); // hides a little casting, then Src->getPointerOperand const Value *DstPtr = getPointerOperand(Dst); // ditto // see how underlying objects alias, then const GEPOperator *SrcGEP =