similar to: [LLVMdev] optimization passes

Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes: > Hi, > > I've read over the "LLVM Language Reference Manual" > a few times, and writing some ll code, but i'm stuck at > a very basic point. How to decrement a counter variable ? > > int %count(int %n) { > EntryBlock: > %cond = seteq int %n, 0 > br bool %cond, label %Exit, label %Next >

Hi, I've read over the "LLVM Language Reference Manual" a few times, and writing some ll code, but i'm stuck at a very basic point. How to decrement a counter variable ? int %count(int %n) { EntryBlock: %cond = seteq int %n, 0 br bool %cond, label %Exit, label %Next Next: ; how to decrement n ? %new_n = sub int %n, 1 br label %EntryBlock Exit: ret int 0 } I guess I

Hello, I'm considering a possibility of writing an llvm backend for my research uses. Unfortunately, I can't find much information on how do to it. I more or less understood now the C backend is implemented, but for real backend I'd need at least register allocation. I beleive there's already register allocator in LLVM and I would like to reuse it if possible. The question is

On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 07:47:00AM +0200, Oscar Fuentes wrote: > Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes: > > I've read over the "LLVM Language Reference Manual" > > a few times, and writing some ll code, but i'm stuck at > > a very basic point. How to decrement a counter variable ? [snip] > > I guess I could malloc a variable and use

I may sound stupid but can someone tell me that after applying optimization sequences randomly whether we can surely say that the final output is correct? I mean if we apply 12 options in random sequence provided by 'opt' command is the output is always correct (i.e. program does the same thing and results are same as expected) ? Is it Yes by implemention of LLVM or we have to check

Actually, Misha, that won't work. The -C option is used directly in docs/Makefile. So the change will have to go into docs/Makefile. Either that or upgrade install to version 5. Reid. On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 11:33, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 01:21:20PM -0600, Feng Chen wrote: > > llvm[1]: Installing HTML documentation > >

On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 03:09:44AM +0800, deveshti at comp.nus.edu.sg wrote: > I may sound stupid but can someone tell me that after applying > optimization sequences randomly whether we can surely say that the > final output is correct? Answering this question is equivalent to solving the Halting Problem. > I mean if we apply 12 options in random sequence provided by 'opt'

Hi List, I am in the preliminary stages of adding a JIT compiler to a sizable Scheme system (PLT Scheme). The original plan was to use GNU Lightning, but 1) it seems to be dead, and 2) LLVM has already done a huge amount of stuff that I would have had to write (poorly) from scratch. At the moment, LLVM seems to be the ideal choice for implementing the Scheme JIT, but there are problems that need

Constant *strcon==ConstantArray::get("Value : %d\n"); Sorry Typo. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 03:45:33PM -0700, Sriraman Tallam wrote: > > I have this call instruction to printf inserted which is causing > > an assertion failure. Any pointers to where I am wrong : > > > > Function

On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 03:50:09PM -0500, Patrick Meredith wrote: > MetaSplit is an anlysis I just finished writing. It doesn't alter > anything, all it does is build a set of "program instructions". For > some reason even though if I run it with any other combination of > passes I've found, anytime I run it with mem2reg I get a seg fault in > dyn_cast!

Thanks Misha. I tried the "gcc -dM -E /tmp/file.c | grep __sparcv9" but there was no output. Maybe this is the probelm, I do have CXX = g++ -mcpu=v9 CC := gcc -mcpu=v9 in the Makefile.config. Do I need to add -m64 as well? Thanks. Shukang On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > Is your compiler configured to define __sparcv9 when it compiles? > The following should tell

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:52:28 -0700 Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 08:07, Jeff Cohen wrote: > > OK. I've built the front end without any heartaches, but I did > > encountered the following glitches: > > > > The documentation of --with-llvmgccdir is a bit ambiguous. I had to > > try several paths

On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:39:27AM -0800, Reid Spencer wrote: > Actually, Misha, that won't work. Sorry, Reid, but I think it will, for the following reason: I don't really know what the -c (lowercase) option does, but install says it's ignored anyway, so that's irrelevant for GNU install. We're talking about the -C option (uppercase). > The -C option is used directly

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Patrick Meredith wrote: > What's different about code that's been mem2reg'd from straight front end > code, or anything that mem2reg hasn't been run on? PHINODES! Yup, front-ends generally don't produce SSA form. :) > It appears to be crashing when I try to cast a Value* that's really a > BB* (from the PHInode operands) to a User*,

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:38:44AM -0700, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Here's the patch to Signals.cpp. assuming that stdio.h is acceptable > (can't imagine it won't work). We prefer #include <cstdio>, since this is C++ after all. :) -- Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu

Here's the patch to Signals.cpp. assuming that stdio.h is acceptable (can't imagine it won't work). On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:29:05 -0700 Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> wrote: > Uh... this may be a silly question, but why can't you include <stdio.h>? > It'd be much better than <iostream>. > > Anyway, I think I'll try this weekend to come

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 03:01:01PM -0500, Anshu Dasgupta wrote: > ><snip> > >for (BasicBlock::iterator I = Dest->begin(); PHINode *PN = > >dyn_cast<PHINode>(I); ++I) > > visitPHINode(*PN); > ><snip> > > > >build_vc71\lib\Transforms\Scalar\SCCP.cpp(202) : error C2275: > >'llvm::PHINode' : illegal use of this type as

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

On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:16:12PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > So I propose: > [snip] > -O3 = aggressive optimization, regardless of computation time with the > effect of producing the fastest executable I would suggest splitting -O3 into 2 or more levels of optimization, because as written, -O3 sounds pretty scary: "regardless of computation time", and given some

On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 04:15:49PM -0700, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I don't know if it's under cvs. It's the "getting started" page > (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GettingStarted.html) in section "Getting > Started Quickly (A Summary)". But careful reading of the remainder of > the page does give the correct path. http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/* is a copy of