similar to: [LLVMdev] Getting access to LLVM

Yes, pretty much. There are a few things that will go in the std namespace because its the way it is and a more natural fit. The other two namespaces already in use (cl and DOT) will be placed under the llvm namespace. The goal is to get everything that is currently at top level and put it in llvm. This means that in your programs, you wouldn't use: cl::XYZ anymore but: llvm::cl::XYZ. Or,

Coming back to the issues that I had integrating LLVM with MSSP, will the code in include/Support also be put in the llvm namespace? That will solve many problems and help prevent others. Rahul ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:13:03 -0600 (CST) >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Subject: [LLVMdev] LLVM namespac'ification >To: LLVMdev List

Oops .. pardon my last incomplete posting, pushed Ctrl-Enter by accident! As I was saying .. Rahul's idea is interesting and would make some aspects of LLVM programming easier, but I wouldn't use it in my source language for the following reasons: 1. Of necessity the "snippet parser" would need to be based on the same language/grammar as AsmParser. Allowing parsing and

Rahul, Were you talking about tracing in the sense of "profiling" (which Anand did), or tracing of values as they are computed for debugging generated code (which I did)? For tracing of values for debugging, the answer is yes: we insert code in each BB and print out the values computed in that BB that are live at the end of the BB (so we don't print out temporaries computed and

Hello, I have observed that the LLVM build takes pretty long time to link executables (i.e. tools). Is that a normal behavior? Thanks, Rahul

On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Rahul Joshi wrote: > Coming back to the issues that I had integrating LLVM with > MSSP, will the code in include/Support also be put in the > llvm namespace? That will solve many problems and help prevent > others. Absolutely. -Chris > ---- Original message ---- > >Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:13:03 -0600 (CST) > >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at

Hi LLVMdev, Sorry about the bad title, but I hope you will get my idea. I think that in many LLVM programs that create/modify the LLVM IR (like say a language frontend/profiler etc), and in other cases too, some of the code is just "mechanical", for example creating function types takes like 4-5 lines of code, but nothing interesting goes on there. I think we can get rid of such code by

Hi LLVMdev, The stuff I am working on requires linking 9-10 LLVM libraries, along with a few libs of my own. The linker is taking a long time to do that, about 6 mins (on a P4 with 512 MB mem). I tried the latest (2.14) release of binutils, but that didn't help. Is anyone aware of any solution to this? Thanks, Rahul

Thanks. I am not trying to modify convert generic LLVM IR and know the requirements (such as specifying address spaces etc.). I guess I just need to ensure that I am sticking to LLVM 3.2 and the SPIR specified subset+ metadata annotations etc. Anyway, I was confused partly because there are references to a SPIR backend in LLVM code (eg: include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h lists spir and spir64 as possible

Hi, I want to run the Mem2Reg pass on a function without using the the LLVM opt utility. I wrote some code, which I am not sure is correct: TS_ASSERT(!verifyFunction(*function)); // find the dominance frontier of the CFG DominanceFrontier DF; DF.runOnFunction(*function); // try to promote stack allocated variables PromoteMemToReg(function->getRegAllocas(), DF, *tgt_data);

Hi Rahul, I believe that ARM support is working in the MCJIT engine (as of llvm 3.1). If it wasn't working in the legacy JIT engine 10 months ago then it probably still isn't. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Rahul Garg Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 1:13 PM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re:

You can use the GetUnderlyingObjects function (notice the S at the end of the name) to collect zero or more underlying objects. This method is similar to GetUnderlyingObject except that it can look through phi and select instructions and return multiple objects. On Mar 14, 2013, at 4:15 AM, rahul <rahul3527 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I am writing a pass that works at

Hi, I checked out the LLVM code today, and it seems Value is no longer a subclass of Annotable. Is IR annotation still supported? Right now, I just need to annotate global variables. Thanks Rahul

The only reference that I found so far here: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2011-09-16/EuroLLVM2011-LLVMplusARM.pdf The presenter states that the ARM JIT support is broken. But this is about 10 months old. Is the ARM JIT support still broken? Am I not looking at the right places in the documentation? Help will be appreciated. thanks, Rahul On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Rahul Garg <rahulgarg44 at

I am writing a llvm pass which inserts some code in a function. In code generation, I want to insert code for a function call. But for this, I need to get function object from list of functions available with Module. When I try to get the function object by specifying function name, it returns null. I suppose this happens because clang removes function prototypes if the function is not called in

Hi, I am writing a pass that works at machine level and runs as last pass in llc (just before converting llvm specific machine instructions into target specific instructions) In this pass I am trying to get underlying object for memory operations. It turns out that due to various optimizations on machine instructions, the memory operand in the operation is not always getelementptr (for e.g., it

Hi Rahul, Thanks for your interest! Our work does not attempt to make any significant contributions to alias analysis, and acts as a client to existing LLVM AA. Furthermore, the options passed to the AESOP frontend scripts are obeyed at compile time, but at link time certain transformations occur unconditionally. Here, AESOP has actually thwarted your experiment by performing inlining just

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Rahul Joshi wrote: > I checked out the LLVM code today, and it seems Value is > no longer a subclass of Annotable. Is IR annotation still > supported? Right now, I just need to annotate global variables. Nope, we removed that from the IR from CVS (what will be 1.2 soon). The Annotation class had several problems and wasn't needed. In any case where you used

I just want to know ,how can I developing a LLVM Pass on Windows' visual studio? I can develop a Pass on linux,but I can't do it on windows. 2013/3/15 <llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu> > Send LLVMdev mailing list submissions to > llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >

The GVN algorithm used in LLVM currently (I'm rewriting it) is the basic hash based RPO algorithm. The new one i'm writing is based on http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=512536 (see https://github.com/dberlin/llvm-gvn-rewrite) LLVM has different algorithms for both scalar PRE and load PRE. They are basically variants of standard PRE algorithms transformed into SSA, but with some