similar to: [LLVMdev] RE: while i have your attention...

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:13:15PM -0500, Nicholas Riley wrote: > The attached patch fixes this. ...but had tabs in it. Misha kindly reminded me off-list that this was bad. Try this one instead. -- Nicholas Riley <njriley at uiuc.edu> | <http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/njriley> -------------- next part -------------- Index: tools/gccld/GenerateCode.cpp

> What I want to do is to insert a call funcation into each basic > block, which is for statistic some information. I recommend that you look at the various pieces of code under llvm/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation, e.g. BlockProfiling.cpp and TraceBasicBlocks.cpp. They do essentially the same thing as you are trying to do. > 1) I implement call function in another c/cpp file and >

> In other words, I'd like to take a set of bytecode files, optimize them > together even though they don't form a complete program, and then write > out the new (optimized) bytecode files. It would be preferable to write > them out to a single archive rather than to individual bytecode files > again. Can this be done in LLVM today? If not, what would it take to >

Hi, Thank Brian Gaeke so much. Following TraceBasicBlocks.cpp, I modified the code as below and could insert instruction or function I need into anywhere in Module. But it works well without BB->getInstList().push_back(InstrCall), and if I add the BB->getInstList().push_back() following new CallInst(), I got error information when runing opt. What is the reason for it? And is it necessary

gccld passes -shared through if it's generating a shared library, but if you're compiling a program that needs to have its symbols externally accessible, it doesn't pass -export-dynamic through to gcc for the final link. The attached patch fixes this. I've tested with a small test case I sent Chris, and with Python; both seem to work. I also fixed some inaccurate comments in

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Patrick Flanagan wrote: > I'm interested in getting LLVM running on OS X so I can play around > with it and check it out. I downloaded the LLVM 1.2 package and > compiled and installed with no errors (used config options > --with-llvmgccidr and --enable-spec2000 pointing to the relevant > directories). I want to look at performance of SPEC CPU2000 with LLVM

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Jeff Cohen wrote: >> I definitely prefer #1. The only concern I have with it is that this makes >> it impossible to move the llvmgcc install directory once it is built (tools >> would not look in the correct directories). >> > This is a very big concern. Users of LLVM generally do not build llvmgcc -- > are actively discouraged from building

Hi all LLVMor, I just tried to compile a simple code and analyze the number of the basic blocks. But after compile, what I got, the bytecode is seems to be optimized bytecode. So the information of basic blocks is not what I expected. I want ot use the code as example to see how some of code optimization methods work. However, after compiling file using llvm test.c -o test, bytecode file

I just had a chance to read some of follow-up comments on Reid's initial document. I agree with Chris's discussion below of what is needed for users to get IPO/lifelong opt'n via LLVM without extensive changes to Makefiles, and about what .o files should contain. This is in perfect agreement with what I just said about how users should view LLVM. --Vikram

Thanks for replying, Yes, I think too that the bytecode file is corrupted. This is the file : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sat, 1 May 2004, [koi8-r] "Valery A.Khamenya[koi8-r] " wrote: > there are two issues concerning invoking optimizations: > > 1. > this document: > http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GettingStarted.html > is very nice, it would be good though to add in a section > > An Example Using the LLVM Tool Chain > > examples on optimization step. That's an

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Long Fei wrote: > > This didn't work as I tried with 197.parser. it works without > "-Wl,-disable-opt" switch though. > > [197.parser]$ llvm-gcc analyze-linkage.c and.c build-disjuncts.c > extract-links.c fast-match.c idiom.c main.c massage.c parse.c post-process.c > print.c prune.c read-dict.c utilities.c xalloc.c word-file.c

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > I've finally got it working! The key point was to pass all bytecode > objects individually to bugpoint, and not to use the pre-linked bytecode from > gccld. nice! > After running for some time bugpoints exits saying: > > *** The following functions are being miscompiled: ucl_alloc main >

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-1] Pertti Kellom�ki wrote: > I succesfully built a byte code version of newlib, so I tried to > use it like this: > > $ llvm-link hello.bc $NEWLIB/libc.a -o linked.bc > > but apparently llvm-link only understands byte code files. Right, llvm-link is the low level bytecode linking interface, not really useful for this sort of use. > Does it

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006, Domagoj Babic wrote: > These should add xIDs for several passes. Please let me know if there're > any problems with the code. I'm a very novice C++ and LLVM programmer, > so please bear with me. The patches look great, applied: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060501/034450.html

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > 2. MODE OF OPERATION > ==================== > The driver will simply read its command line arguments, read its > configuration data, and invoke the compilation, linking, and > optimization tools necessary to complete the user's request. Its basic I'm not sure that I agree with this. Compilers need to be extremely predictable and

I have recently built the LLVM suite .. The problem is when I run llvmgcc( after setting alias to $LLVM ) gcc: installation problem, cannot exec `gccld': No such file or directory the LLVM_LIB_SEARCH_PATH=.. is set to LLVMGCCDIR/bytecode-libs Any idea

Hi all LLVM CVS users, Recently, the LLVM makefiles have changed how runtime libraries are handled for the C/C++ frontend. Please take the following steps (assuming 'llvmgccdir' is whatever you normally pass to configure as the --with-llvmgcdir option): 1. Go into your llvm/runtime directory, and run 'make install-bytecode'. This will install runtime libraries into

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Jeff Cohen wrote: > >>> I definitely prefer #1. The only concern I have with it is that >>> this makes it impossible to move the llvmgcc install directory once >>> it is built (tools would not look in the correct directories). >>> >> This is a very big concern. Users of LLVM generally do not build

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=GB2312" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Yes, I checked that envvar, and it is set.<br> The error msg when compiling a .c