similar to: [LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 800 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks"

2007 Aug 09
4
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
Hi Tanya and everybody, Ty for your support. I too believe it should not be complicated. But I was not being able to do it. For instance, I tried to run this code below: BB->push_back(&(BB->front())); BB->pop_front(); But it did not work (kinda obvious why). Nor this: BB->push_back(BB->begin()); BB->pop_front(); But also did not work. It seams the same
2007 Aug 08
0
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
> I need a way to reorder instructions inside MachineBasicBlocks or > MachineFunctions. > I've been searching for it but I have not found an example in the code yet. For MachineBasicBlocks, check out this doc: http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1MachineBasicBlock.html I believe its basically the same as basic blocks in that you can manipulate the instruction list. Otherwise, you
2007 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
Yup, You are right. That exploded. I missed some lines in between. there was a .reserve(total) in the actual code. But, there is some side effect I still could not find. 2007/8/16, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org>: > > On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Emílio Wuerges wrote: > > -- > > int total = BB->size(); > > std::vector<MachineInstr*>
2007 Aug 10
2
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
For adding the nop: TII->insertNoop(*BB, BB->end()); 2007/8/9, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org>: > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Emílio Wuerges wrote: > > I too believe it should not be complicated. > > But I was not being able to do it. > > Finally, after some thinking (and tinkering), this worked like a charm: > > > > MachineInstr* mi =
2007 Aug 16
0
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
Hi all, A week agoo I sent an email about reordering instruction in basicblocks. And ... I was able to do it. I guess so, at least. Now when compiling my test program, llc dumps: -- llc: /home/mentat/llvm_work/llvm/lib/CodeGen/LiveVariables.cpp:155: void llvm::LiveVariables::HandleVirtRegUse(llvm::LiveVariables::VarInfo&, llvm::MachineBasicBlock*, llvm::MachineInstr*): Assertion
2007 Aug 16
2
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Em�lio Wuerges wrote: > -- > int total = BB->size(); > std::vector<MachineInstr*> positionmap(total); > for (int i = 0; i< total; ++i) > positionmap.push_back(BB->remove(BB->begin())); > for(int i = 0; i< total; ++i) > BB->push_back(positionmap[i]); > -- This doesn't do what you think. This line:
2007 Sep 04
0
[LLVMdev] How to put a pass for last?
Hello guys, I'm writing a pass that must check every machine instruction that will go to assembly. I've put my pass registration just before the "addAsmEmmiter" line in LLVMTargetMachine.cpp But, iterating trought machine functions and basic blocks inside the functions, there are still machine instructions that I cant reach. This is the beginnig of the asm output of my example
2008 May 19
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
GCC for AVR is awesome but, as far as I know, until very little time ago, compiler support for PIC was close to none. 2008/5/19 Jonathan S. Shapiro <shap at eros-os.com>: > I have a client who might well make use of an AVR32 port, but I suspect > that machine is very different than the one you are currently examining. > > > shap > On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 12:38 -0600, John
2008 May 11
0
[LLVMdev] Preferring to use GCC instead of LLVM
Is this thread suposed to be a bad joke? 2008/5/10 kr512 <kr512 at optusnet.com.au>: > > Chris Lattner wrote: >> If you'd prefer to use GCC, go for it. No one is forcing >> you to use LLVM. > > No, we would prefer to use LLVM, but a missing part in LLVM > makes it difficult. It would be wonderful if this missing > part could be supplied. > >> You
2007 Aug 09
0
[LLVMdev] Changing basic blocks
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Em�lio Wuerges wrote: > I too believe it should not be complicated. > But I was not being able to do it. > Finally, after some thinking (and tinkering), this worked like a charm: > > MachineInstr* mi = BB->remove(BB->begin()); > BB->push_back(mi); > > But, is there a better way to do it? This is a good way to do a single
2008 May 19
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
Anyone else interested in an AVR backend? If so, for what members of the AVR family? If we do a port, likely it'll support only the ATmegas. John
2008 May 19
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
I have a client who might well make use of an AVR32 port, but I suspect that machine is very different than the one you are currently examining. shap On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 12:38 -0600, John Regehr wrote: > Anyone else interested in an AVR backend? > > If so, for what members of the AVR family? If we do a port, likely it'll > support only the ATmegas. > > John >
2009 Apr 13
0
[LLVMdev] Porting LLVM backend is no fun yet
Hi Greg, I understand your frustration. I've been on this mailing list for a little over a year hoping that by osmosis I could get a a better handle on writing a back end for LLVM. Although I feel more comfortable with the nomenclature, I still do not have a clue as to how to begin (actually I do, but it sounds more dramatic saying it this way). I've read the documentation, but
2008 May 11
8
[LLVMdev] Preferring to use GCC instead of LLVM
Chris Lattner wrote: > If you'd prefer to use GCC, go for it. No one is forcing > you to use LLVM. No, we would prefer to use LLVM, but a missing part in LLVM makes it difficult. It would be wonderful if this missing part could be supplied. > You are seriously ignorant of what LLVM is all about. > Please go inform yourself. Alright, I read some more on llvm.org and it
2009 Apr 12
9
[LLVMdev] Porting LLVM backend is no fun yet
As we've already seen, David Chisnall prefers hacking LLVM over GCC (see http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1215438): "In contrast, every time I look at the GCC code, it takes two people to prevent me from clawing my eyeballs out." I'm sorry to report that so-far I have had the opposite experience. Some years ago, I ported binutils (via CGEN) and GCC to an
2016 Jul 08
2
Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] mllib: Add some imperative list manipulation functions.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:08:43PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 07:00:46PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > On Thursday 07 July 2016 17:30:03 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > This adds imperative list manipulation functions inspired by Perl. > > > The functions are passed list refs which get updated in place. > > > > > > This
2001 Apr 13
1
doubt
http://www.openssh.com/faq.html#3.5 It's a documented issue with Slackware. - Ben On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Luiz Henrique wrote: > hi, i'm trying to configure the opensshd package.. > i'm on a slack 7.1 box, but i always got the permision denied message, the auth is by password.... i've tried to change the sshd_config but it hasn't work. > I don't have pam instaled.
2009 May 22
1
Trivial typo in sample help file
Hi, just found a small typo in help(sample). In 'Arguments' section, where says n: a non-negaiive integer, the number of items to choose from. should be n: a non-negative integer, the number of items to choose from. I didn't filled a bug report because this is very trivial. Thanks, -- Fernando Mayer Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Ecologia (PPGE) Universidade Federal de Santa
2016 Jan 22
8
[GlobalISel][RFC] Thoughts on MachineModulePass
Hi, In the initial thread of the proposal for GlobalISel, I have mentioned that it may be interesting to have a kind of MachineModulePass. Marcello mentioned this would be useful for their current pipeline. I am interested in knowing: 1. If anyone else is interested for such concept? 2. What kind of information should we make accessible in an hypothetical MachineModule? I.e., how do you plan to
2009 Sep 08
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] & Question: Preserving ProfileInfo for backend.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, the second part of my work is to preserve the profiling information through all the transformation passes and make it available to the backend machinery. Attached is an example patch on how I plan to preserve the information for a given transformation pass. And now comes the question into place: whats the best way to attach the profile info