similar to: [LLVMdev] Compilation without optimization

Thanks !! But if i generate a .bc file like this and then run my pass over it like this : opt -load /home/llvm-cvs/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello <helloprog.bc> class_prog.bc Will the new .bc file (class_prog.bc) be also without optimizations ?opt also does some optimizations.Can I control them ? Thanks Tanu Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005,

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > Thanks for the reply. > > I wish to compile without optimizations ( the option being turned off ) > but still generate bytecode file. > > Options -S , -c removes optimizations but I also need .bc file to > experiment and use further. Passing "-Wa,-disable-opt -Wl,-disable-opt" will disable *all* cleanup and optimizations

Hi, Actually I started with hello.cpp povided as an example pass and modified and made my pass which does randomization. I have been working on it and running over programs and it always worked fine but now lately i had checked out a newer version (llvm)which i believed was working fine too but now as i did some modifications and tried to compile my pass i got these errors. My pass simply

Thanks a lot for replying. I would check my system gcc configuration. I got very useful replies from dev list regarding my earlier question but yet not able to determine block size. That I want in total size of a block in a function in bytes and not just the number of instructions.LLVM Tool gives most of the information e.g function bytes etc....but not individual block. Thanks Tanu Chris

Hello, I am trying to rum my pass (.cpp file) and I am getting the following error. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- g++: /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/3.4.2/../../../crti.o: No such file or directory g++: /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/3.4.2/crtbeginS.o: No such file or directory g++:

This is exactly what i m trying : opt -load /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello <helloprog.bc> /dev/null Tanu Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I wrote a pass which randomizes basic blocks and insert new block.But > when i run another pass over it which simply lists all basic blocks I > don't get

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I created a new block and inserted it into the present basic block list > , but I get this error: > > opt: BasicBlock.cpp:83: virtual llvm::BasicBlock::~BasicBlock(): Assertion `getParent() == 0 && "BasicBlock still linked into the program!"' failed. > > The program completes its task and i get this in the end. I am

Thanks a lot for replying...but I am not doing any deleting or removing node ...I am trying to insert a "new" entry node in an existing list. In another reply I understood (also mentioned on the site) that no other block can branch to the entry block. How do I achieve this ? Is it feasible?Let me know if there is any example. Thanks again, Tanu Chris Lattner <sabre at

Thanks for the reply :-) I am actually looking for ways to determine "size" of code segment when the program is in native code. Any suggestions to do that ? Tanu Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > > Hey, > > I have written a pass and wishes to measure its performance overhead > after running it over a

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

On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 22:34 -0600, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > > > Thanks for the reply :-) > > I am actually looking for ways to determine "size" of code segment when the program is in native code. > > Any suggestions to do that ? > > Compile it with llvm to a native .o or .exe file, then run 'size' on it? >

Tanu Sharma wrote: > Hello, > > In an attempt to randomise the basic blocks in a function, is it > possible that I can randomise the entry block as well? And maybe insert > some instructions in the pass to call entry block while running the > program ? > > Is it feasible? > > What does entry block consist of ? The entry block, by definition, is the first basic

Thanks for the reply, Actually I m aiming towards determining two values: - number of basic blocks in a program For this I have used Statistic facility provided in llvm and increasing the counter for each basic block for each function.but for some reason , I m getting different number everytime !! Is Statistic is the right way to do it ? - Average basic block size in a program ( in bytes)

Thanks for replying . I came across another problem while trying it. The following compilation is not working: ( with the native option) llvmgcc x.c -o a.out -Wl,-native I get this error: gccld: a.out.s: Can't destroy file: ut.s How can I fix that ? Thanks Tanu Andrew Lenharth <alenhar2 at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 22:34 -0600, Chris Lattner wrote: > On

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > Thanks for replying . > I came across another problem while trying it. > The following compilation is not working: ( with the native option) > > llvmgcc x.c -o a.out -Wl,-native > > I get this error: > > gccld: a.out.s: Can't destroy file: ut.s > > How can I fix that ? This bug has been fixed in CVS, please update your

I would try that ..Thanks Another thing that I want to do is to randomize functions within a program (or file ), whatever is easier to do in llvm .Also please tell me how can I randomize global variables ? Thanks TS Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Mon, 30 May 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I have been trying to compile the SPEC benchmark but have failed even > after

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I have trouble using the llvm tools.Some of the errors are : > > $ llvm-dis prog.bc > $ llvm-dis: Invalid Top Level Block Length! Type:1, Size:456 (Vers=0, Pos=12) Can you explain how you generated this bytecode file? It looks corrupted or something. Also, can you send the actual bytecode file itself? Thanks! -Chris >

Thanks a lot for replying. I have another query. If branching to the entry block is not legal in llvm how should I be able to create a new entry block for any existing list? I created a new block and inserted it into the present basic block list , but I get this error: opt: BasicBlock.cpp:83: virtual llvm::BasicBlock::~BasicBlock(): Assertion `getParent() == 0 && "BasicBlock

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > > I have a doubt. > > This is an excerpt of the raw report I get after running Spec benchmarks > through llvm-test.I am trying to calculate the program execution > time.Does the output result in bold corresponds to "lli time" in > Makefile.spec ? I am not interested in llc, jit or cbe.I simply need the > normal

Thanks a lot Chris. Regarding basic block size I wish to calculate both: - The number of bytecode bytes - The number of machine code bytes for some target? TS Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > Thanks for the reply, > > Actually I m aiming towards determining two values: > > - number of basic blocks in a program For