similar to: [LLVMdev] single exit BB

Well, I'm off to a bad start in this group. I found the answer to my question just 10 minutes after I posted, and it was a basic question. To disable optimizations in the assembler and linker phases, you pass the -disable-opt flag in the command line like this: prompt% llvm-gcc -Wa,-disable-opt -Wl,-disable-opt <source> -- Jerry Hom

First, thanks to those who have responded to my earlier pleas for help. You have either directly or indirectly helped me find the answers I needed. I'm slowly getting up to speed with LLVM. Now I have 2 more questions. 1) I'm using LLVM 1.8a with llvm-gcc3. I'm trying to compile firefox (with regular gcc and make) while using LLVM to automatically instrument one source file

Jerry Hom wrote: I haven't seen anyone answer this question yet, so I'll take a crack at it: > First, thanks to those who have responded to my earlier pleas for > help. You have either directly or indirectly helped me find the > answers I needed. I'm slowly getting up to speed with LLVM. Now I > have 2 more questions. > > 1) I'm using LLVM 1.8a with

I have only just begun looking through the docs for LLVM. I have read through some of the PP presentations to get an idea of the modularity of LLVM. May someone be so kind to point me to some documentation on how to communicate with the LLVM modules (specifically the optimizer) from some third party piece of software (my compiler)? I am hoping there is a file format, or some serialization, that

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I need to solicit your opinion about something. >> >> I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of LLVM_LIB_SEARCH_PATH. Right >> now the linkers will use this environment variable if it specifies a >> single directory. It will look in that directory to find

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

Valery A.Khamenya wrote: >>For example: >>$ llvmgcc ackerman.c -o ackerman -Wl,-native-cbe > > > BTW, Chris, what should be then an analogy > of "gcc -O3 -S foo.c" in LLVM framework? > > The invocation of > > $ llvmgcc -S ackerman.c -o ackerman -Wl,-native-cbe > > does not produce native assebler output as one might expect.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Hello, > > I need to solicit your opinion about something. > > I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of LLVM_LIB_SEARCH_PATH. Right > now the linkers will use this environment variable if it specifies a > single directory. It will look in that directory to find libraries when > things like -lc or -lcrtend are specified on

Hi llvmer, I am trying to learn how to use llvm. My question is described as the following, there has already a testcase code, and I get bytecode by using llvmgcc. What I want to do is to insert a call funcation into each basic block, which is for statistic some information. 1) I implement call function in another c/cpp file and can I insert the external call function to existed bytecode ? if it

LLVMers, As part of my work on bug 353: Create Front End Framework And Compiler Driver (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/PR353), I'm starting a discussion on the design and requirements of the compiler driver. If you have comments on this, by all means PLEASE chime in. This is by no means cast in stone. The results of the ensuing discussion will be documented in PR353 (and elsewhere) and I'll use

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

Hello, I need to solicit your opinion about something. I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of LLVM_LIB_SEARCH_PATH. Right now the linkers will use this environment variable if it specifies a single directory. It will look in that directory to find libraries when things like -lc or -lcrtend are specified on the command line. Right now, the only known place this is useful to set to is the

> 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 >

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'm CC'ing the llvm-dev list because other people are more knowledgeable about the bytecode format/encoding than I am. Please follow-up the replies to the list. On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:27:53AM -0700, Yiping Fan wrote: > We also want to extend the llvm instructions/intrinsic > functions/types/passes to support our high-level synthesis for > hardware. First of all, we want to

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 vs gcc. I was able to successfully compile and run the hello

Hello. I'm wondering if LLVM can generate a call graph across multiple files? Does 'analyze' accept multiple bytecode files? Can I concatenate multiple bytecode files into a single file for input? Thanks. -- Jerry Hom

> For example: > $ llvmgcc ackerman.c -o ackerman -Wl,-native-cbe BTW, Chris, what should be then an analogy of "gcc -O3 -S foo.c" in LLVM framework? The invocation of $ llvmgcc -S ackerman.c -o ackerman -Wl,-native-cbe does not produce native assebler output as one might expect. -- Valery

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

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