similar to: [LLVMdev] Can I disable the optimizaiton for llvmgcc?

Hi devels, 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. 2. If i am not wrong there is no tool, which integrates all steps: llvmgcc->opt->llc into something like llcc (and

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

Suppose, I have a Pass1 implemented as a subclass of Pass, with source code in the directory of llvm source base( transform/analyze ) I can run that pass through opt on the bytecode emitted by gcc frontend through opt tool. However, I want that Pass1 to be the part of the actual GCC compiler. I want to know how I can position Pass1 among other passes /optimizations/ code generations. e.g if

Hi, I'm able to build the llvm tools on the MinGW platform: burg, fpcmp, tblgen, llvm-as, llvm-dis, opt, gccas, llc, llvm-link, lli, gccld, llvm-stub, analyze and extract. I wonder if these tools are sufficient to start build the cfrontend? Henrik. _________________________________________________________________ Undg� pop-ups med MSN Toolbar - http://toolbar.msn.dk hent den gratis!

Hi, I am working on a project with LLVM. What I need to do is to generate/insert some dummy/dead basic blocls which never have chance to be executed and put some instructions in those dummy/dead basic blocks. So far, the dummy/dead BB insertion is done. I am trying insert instructions in those dummy/dead BB. Actually, I can insert the legal instructions to dummy/dead BB, however, I really want

Hi, I'm a newbie and just installed LLVM on a Linux box. I followe "The LLVM Getting Started Guide" on the web and have some trouble on the section "An Example Using the LLVM Tool Chain". When I compile the simple hello.c program with "llvmgcc hello.c -o hello", the system complains -- gcc: installation problem, cannot exec `gccas': Permission denied. Does

On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Jeff Cohen wrote: > The problem with building the frontend on Windows is that gcc cannot be > bootstrapped using Window's native compiler -- i.e. VC++ -- unlike every > other platform. It can be built on Windows using gcc, of course, but > even then only if the entire GNU environment is present. Yeah, annoying. Unfortunately we're not up to fixing GCC :)

I am investigating some inlining issue, so I did llvm-gcc aaa.c bbb.c ... nnn.c -o output opt -inline -inline-threshold=xxx < output.bc | llc -march=c > output_inline.c 1) I noticed that even if I set xxx to 0 or even a very small negative number, many functions are eliminated. I am wondering if these functions are inlined by the frontend, or identified as deadcode. For instance,

The problem with building the frontend on Windows is that gcc cannot be bootstrapped using Window's native compiler -- i.e. VC++ -- unlike every other platform. It can be built on Windows using gcc, of course, but even then only if the entire GNU environment is present. The real problem is that the bootstrapped frontend binaries built using gcc may not properly link with LLVM binaries built

Ryan Brown wrote: > I don't think llvm-gcc4 uses gccas or gccld, but it can emit bytecode > if you give it the --emit-llvm option: > llvm-gcc --emit-llvm -c -o foo.bc foo.c That's a bit asymmetric with the previous gcc3 version, isn't it? That would mean that the "An Example Using the LLVM Tool Chain" section needs to be updated for the gcc4 frontend. OTOH, I could

I know that Al Stone has compiled llvm-gcc4 successfully and I can report the same. The problem I consistently run into is that llvm-gcc ends up producing native format output; it does not produce bytecode, nor does it invoke gccas or gccld. I'm using the latest svn, and my configure args are: --prefix=/work/scottm/llvm-cfrontend/obj/../i686-pc-linux-gnu \

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 strncasecmp.c -Wa,-disable-opt -Wl,-disable-opt -lm -o llvm_parser [197.parser]$

hello everyone, I few days ago I had some code (for the PyPy project) that llc - march=c converted to a switch statement and gcc compiled that nicely to a jumptable in the .s file. Now I try to reproduce when directly going from a .ll to a .s file. But I now see a long list of compare and jumps instead of the jumptable. Is there a transformation that does this if->switch(ing) or is

Long Fei wrote: > > I am investigating some inlining issue, so I did > > llvm-gcc aaa.c bbb.c ... nnn.c -o output > opt -inline -inline-threshold=xxx < output.bc | llc -march=c > > output_inline.c I am unsure of whether the LLVM GCC frontend does any inlining. However, I do know that your methods above run the LLVM inlining pass, albeit indirectly. If you use

> I can run that pass through opt on the bytecode emitted by gcc frontend > through opt tool. However, I want that Pass1 to be the part of the > actual GCC compiler. I want to know how I can position Pass1 among > other passes /optimizations/ code generations. I had a similar question and Chris recommended that I edit the addPassesToEmitAssembly method. Quoting him: "

On May 5, Misha Brukman wrote: > Maybe we can use you for a testimonial... :) Certainly. > > Tail Call Elimination: > > > > I've read over the "Random llvm notes", and see that you guys have > > though about this already. > > > > However, the note dates from last year, so I am wondering if there is > > an implementation in the works.

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

I don't think llvm-gcc4 uses gccas or gccld, but it can emit bytecode if you give it the --emit-llvm option: llvm-gcc --emit-llvm -c -o foo.bc foo.c On 8/14/06, Scott Michel <scottm at rushg.aero.org> wrote: > I know that Al Stone has compiled llvm-gcc4 successfully and I can > report the same. The problem I consistently run into is that llvm-gcc > ends up producing native

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Bill Wendling wrote: > I admit a bias here: I've worked with MS style INI files. They didn't > leave a good impression with me. However, they do fit the bill for a lot > of applications. What do you envision a typical INI file to look like? I was thinking of something simple like this: [.c] compile = cc1 %in -o %out optimize = gccas %in -o %out.bc link

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I few days ago I had some code (for the PyPy project) that llc -march=c > converted to a switch statement and gcc compiled that nicely to a jumptable > in the .s file. Now I try to reproduce when directly going from a .ll to a .s > file. But I now see a long list of compare and jumps instead of the > jumptable. Is there a