similar to: [LLVMdev] how to convert into SSA form

llvm-as file.bc | opt -mem2reg | llvm-dis > file.ll On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 09:12 +0800, lizhuo wrote: > meone tell me how to convert LLVM bytecode into minimal SSA form ? > or just depend on GCC frontend ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Reid Spencer wrote: > llvm-as file.bc | opt -mem2reg | llvm-dis > file.ll llvm-as < file.bc | opt -mem2reg | llvm-dis > file.ll Note the extra "<". -Chris > On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 09:12 +0800, lizhuo wrote: >> meone tell me how to convert LLVM bytecode into minimal SSA form ? >> or just depend on GCC frontend ? > -Chris --

On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:04:36PM -0600, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Reid Spencer wrote: > >llvm-as file.bc | opt -mem2reg | llvm-dis > file.ll > > llvm-as < file.bc | opt -mem2reg | llvm-dis > file.ll > > Note the extra "<". Strictly speaking, llvm-as converts .ll to .bc so that would be: llvm-as < input.ll | opt -mem2reg |

Hi, I have been looking into the code that generates the LLVM assembly in the LLVM front end, but I am not very sure if at the time that the llvm_c_expand_body_1 function is called, the SSA form was already constructed (each definition dominates all the uses). Can somebody please tell me? Thanks

Ricardo wrote: > Hi, > > I have been looking into the code that generates the LLVM assembly in the LLVM front end, but I am > not very sure if at the time that the llvm_c_expand_body_1 function is called, the SSA form was > already constructed (each definition dominates all the uses). Can somebody please tell me? The LLVM GCC frontend does not translate variables directly into

Thanks for the explanation. It's more clear now The only thing that seems strange is that in the function llvm_expand_shortcircuit_truth_expr in the front end, there is the creation of a PHI instruction. If there is no SSA yet, why do you do that? Thanks in advance --- John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: > Ricardo wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have been

LLVM IR is always in SSA form. If you *really* don't want it to be, use allocas for everything and then don't run the mem2reg optimization pass. This will represent all of your variables as stack locations instead of registers, and it will not be SSA. Reid On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 3:55 PM, ivtm <martinaide1 at yahoo.com> wrote: > > I tried the -O0 option and I am still

But, the mem2reg pass removes all load store instructions. It replaces all variables by their if possible (kind of constant propagation). I have generated the bitcode of the source program and the applied the mem2reg pass and obviously not getting desired thing. What I want is convert it into SSA form without replacing any variable by their constant value. Please elaborate on your point. Also,

Chris Lattner,您好！ I see , Thank you very much ! ======= 2005-06-06 23:39:20 您在来信中写道：======= >On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, aqex wrote: >> hi, >> I have one question about up reference, why use \nested_level_count in type description. >> and have to handle it in HandleUpRefs() (AsmParser/llvmAsmParser.y) , >> >> why not just insert type name and return in calcTypeName()

Hello, for some my use case, I'd like to temporary break SSA property and then ask LLVM to restore it. Here's more details: if (i < 0) { i = -i; } This is a C code example. I'm trying to create a value range analysis, which will determine, that after this code, 'i' is non-negative. In SSA form, this will become i = 0; if (i < 0) { i.2 = -i; }

Suppose my Input function is like : myfunc(int x,int y){ int a=2, b=3,c=5; if(x>y) { c=a+b; a=6; } else { c=a*b; b=4; } a=c+a; c=a+b; } and the output should be : myfunc(int x,int y){ int a.0=2, b.0=3,c.0=5; if(x>y) { c.1=a.0+b.0; a.1=6; } else { c.2=a.0*b.0; b.1=4; }

Hi, Can anyone tell me, whether it is possible to convert a program into SSA form without considering algebric equivalence ? regards, Chayan

There is no existing pass to do this in LLVM, mostly because it wouldn't be useful for optimizing programs. From your input, mem2reg produces: define i32 @myfunc(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind { entry: %cmp = icmp sgt i32 %x, %y ; <i1> [#uses=1] br i1 %cmp, label %if.then, label %if.else if.then: ; preds = %entry %add = add

You can use STOREs and LOADs on memory and then use mem2reg pass. 2010/6/1 Chayan Sarkar <chayan.ju at gmail.com>: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me, whether it is possible to convert a program into > SSA form without considering algebric equivalence ? > > regards, > Chayan > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at

hi, I have one question about up reference, why use \nested_level_count in type description. and have to handle it in HandleUpRefs() (AsmParser/llvmAsmParser.y) , why not just insert type name and return in calcTypeName() (AsmWriter.cpp) ; As you mention in "How to build recursively type" , %mylist = type { %mylist*, int } is accepted . Is it neccessary to use

Hi All, When I run the following command llvm-gcc -03 -emit-llvm test.cpp -c -o test.bc or llvm-gcc -emit-llvm test.cpp -c -o test.bc on the program test.cpp, the IR representation is not in SSA form. I do not see any phi functions. program: test.cpp int main(int argc, char **argv) { int a[2],i,j; for(i=0;i<2;i++) { a[i] = i; } return a[1]; } Any clarifications will be

> > Here's 'foo' is always called with positive value. However, the value > range > assigned to 'i' variable can be only [-inf, +inf], because uses of 'i' > outside of condition can get any value. So, I'd like to convert the > above to: > > i = 0; > if (i > 0) { > i = change_value_range(i); > foo(i); > } I

On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 AM, Chayan Sarkar <chayan.ju at gmail.com> wrote: > But, the mem2reg pass removes all load store instructions. It replaces > all variables by their if possible (kind of constant propagation). I > have generated the bitcode of the source program and the applied the > mem2reg pass and obviously not getting desired thing. > > What I want is convert

On 3/29/11 12:26 PM, George Baah wrote: > Hi All, > When I run the following command > llvm-gcc -03 -emit-llvm test.cpp -c -o test.bc or llvm-gcc -emit-llvm > test.cpp -c -o test.bc > > on the program test.cpp, the IR representation is not in SSA form. > I do not see any phi functions. Actually, it is in SSA form (or more precisely, the virtual registers are in SSA form;

I tried the -O0 option and I am still getting output in SSA form: I do: llvm-gcc -O0 -emit-llvm -c x.c -o x.bc, and then: llvm-dis x.bc Anton Korobeynikov-2 wrote: > >> At any rate, is there an option to the llvm-gcc --emit-llvm to tell it to >> produce .bc files that are at least space optimized (or even better, not >> in >> SSA form) ? > Yes, -O0 > >