similar to: About LLVM Pass dependency

Hi Hongbin I am not quite familiar with AnalysisUsage, let me correct question a bit. I have read Writing Pass <http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#specifying-interactions-between-passes>, All examples that i see here are based on collecting information .i.e Analysis Passes. I wonder if this applies to Transformation passes also. e.g. void MyInliner::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage

I am trying to add an analysis pass as a FunctionPass, and let LICM (LoopPass) depends upon it. So in LICM.cpp, I have the following: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.setPreservesCFG(); AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>(); AU.addRequiredID(LoopSimplifyID); AU.addRequired<AliasAnalysis>();

I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this : virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.setPreservesCFG(); AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();

Does anyone know what the guidelines are supposed to be for properly initializing a pass? Looking around, we seem to have three styles of pass registration in use. INITIALIZE_PASS(...) INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(...) INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(...) ... INITIALIZE_PASS_END(...) static RegisterPass<FooPass> X(...); (This is the one encouraged in the docs, but seemingly the least widely used

That works. Thanks. One more followup question though. Once i run opt on bitcode, there is not useful output/transform on bitcode. this rpt files are extra. I am hoping to do something like this, ; RUN: FileCheck --input-file=a.rpt.gold --check-prefix=CHECK-A < a.rpt ; RUN: FileCheck --input-file=b.rpt.gold --check-prefix=CHECK-B < b.rpt i did not find much examples in tests hence

Hello I have pass operating on bitcode file which produces more than one equivalent representation. opt --my-pass <%s | Filecheck %s --my-pass generates files a.rpt b.rpt c.rpt . How do i write test without writing all 3 files to stdin. I have considered CHECK-LABEL for each. it creates bulky checks. Thanks Mahesh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion failed: (ResultPass && "getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was not " "'required' by pass!"), function getAnalysisID But I already have: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); } And changed the bottom of my pass too: char Hello::ID =

I'm writing a Pass that I would like to remain loadable by opt. The pass also requires DominatorTree(for PromoteMemToReg). Looking for examples the only way I found to require a dependecny is by doing something like this: char Hello::ID = 0; namespace llvm { void initializeHelloPass(llvm::PassRegistry&); } INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(Hello, "hello", "Hello

When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will segfault. What's odd is that if I rearrange this (add required for DominatorTree before LoopInfo), it does not segfault. I realize that LoopInfo requires and preserves DominatorTree, but this

Just shows me what I expect void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); So I'm only using it for DominatorTree(so I can use PromoteMemToReg). Thanks On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote: >> >> Sorry to keep dragging

On 11/08/2011 07:33 PM, ret val wrote: > Sorry to keep dragging this out on you. Im now getting: Assertion > failed: (ResultPass&& "getAnalysis*() called on an analysis that was > not " "'required' by pass!"), function getAnalysisID > > But I already have: > void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage&AU) const { >

I still have the addRequired: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); } The other line DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); Is for later use when I try to use PromoteMemToReg On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Michael Ilseman <michael at lunarg.com> wrote: > Something's

Hi Michael, > When migrating my project to 2.9, I've encountered a strange segfault > where if a ModulePass's getAnalysisUsage adds LoopInfo and > DominatorTree, then llvm::PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisUsage will > segfault. I suggest you build LLVM with assertions enabled - then you should get a helpful error message rather than a segfault. I think you are not allowed to

Hi, You need to initialize your pass with: INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass) INITIALIZE_PASS_END(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) So as to both register your pass, and have

On 11/08/2011 03:20 AM, ret val wrote: > I'm writing a Pass that I would like to remain loadable by opt. The > pass also requires DominatorTree(for PromoteMemToReg). > > Looking for examples the only way I found to require a dependecny is > by doing something like this: > char Hello::ID = 0; > namespace llvm { void

On Oct 30, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 10/30/2012 4:10 PM, Ashwin kumar wrote: >> >> Assertion failed: (PI && "Expected required passes to be initialized"), >> function schedulePass, file PassManager.cpp, line 597. >> >> >> I register the passes using RegisterPass function call.

Hi I am executing following steps to convert assembly to object code. llc -march=x86-64 -filetype=asm input.ll -o input.s g++ -g -c -o input.s --input.o inshort ll --> llc --> .s -->g++ -->obj original source was something like this { printf(" **** %s ****",str); } input.s turn out to be movq .str at GOTPCREL(%rip),%rdi movq .str.1 at GOTPCREL(%rip),%rsi xorl

Thanks for the response. I do have assertions enabled, and none of them are getting hit. I did do a search of the mailing list for the past year (approximately) before writing my email, and what I found was that you should be allowed to use LoopInfo and other analysis function passes from a module pass, with the only difference being that getAnalysis is passed the function. The example code I

Something's different here, earlier in the thread you said you had: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); } Now you have: void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { DominatorTree *dt = &getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(); I'm sort of confused, why did this change happen? I think the

Your constructor is not calling initializeTestMPPass(), and you're using RegisterPass which I think was deprecated in favor of INITIALIZE_PASS. You can look at, for example, lib/Transforms/Scalar/IndVarSimplify.cpp for examples of how to initialize, e.g. having "INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LoopInfo)" sandwiched between BEGIN and END. Note that you'll want a forward declaration of