similar to: [LLVMdev] [PATCH]: New implementation of andersens

Hi Danny, I captured this as PR359: http://llvm.org/PR1359 Reid. On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:09:14 -0400 "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Hi guys, i'm not going to have time to work on this for >a month or > two, so i figured i'd post it. > > This patch > > 1. reworks the andersen's implementation to support >field

Thanks for the reply. Would you happen to know whether there a global alias analysis written for LLVM that is more robust? Is the Steensgaard pass any more reliable? Max On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > At one point it handled function pointers. > As chris says, it's buggy and probably broken. > Some function pointers also do

At one point it handled function pointers. As chris says, it's buggy and probably broken. Some function pointers also do point to the universal set (like global function pointers). On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Chris Lattner<clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Max Stonebraker wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Does the LLVM Andersens alias analysis

On Aug 26, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Max Stonebraker wrote: > Hello, > > Does the LLVM Andersens alias analysis handle function pointers > precisely? I ran it and it looks like it says every function points > points to the universal set. Is this what I should expect? Hi Max, I don't know the answer offhand but please keep in mind that the current andersen's pass has many

> You can solve andersens and steengaards and everything else using > standard dataflow solvers, and that's an implementation strategy, but > it will be really slow. > > Part of the tradeoff is how fast something runs, and approaches that > are orders of magnitude faster often change the calculus of what > people do. For example, before hardekopf's work, andersens

Hi guys, i'm not going to have time to work on this for a month or two, so i figured i'd post it. This patch 1. reworks the andersen's implementation to support field sensitivity (though field-sensitive constraints are not generated directly yet), and uses it to do indirect function call support. 2. Rewrites the solver to be state of the art in terms of speed. kimwitu++ used to take

Might I suggest the following patch, because this issue has bite me too? You're lured in by the initial good results from the Andersens alias analysis, only to discover the bugs later on. Robert Zeh On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:11 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 26, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Max Stonebraker wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Does the LLVM Andersens alias analysis handle

Hi all, Did someone forget to check-in a patch? I'm getting this error during compilation on PPC: /Volumes/SandBox/Clean/llvm-9999-01.roots/llvm-9999-01~obj/src/llvm/lib/Analysis/IPA/Andersens.cpp: In function 'void dumpToDOUT(llvm::SparseBitVector<128u>*)': /Volumes/SandBox/Clean/llvm-9999-01.roots/llvm-9999-01~obj/src/llvm/lib/Analysis/IPA/Andersens.cpp:1189: error: no

On Sep 24, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi all, > > Did someone forget to check-in a patch? I'm getting this error during > compilation on PPC: A recent checkout compiled fine for me (on x86). > /Volumes/SandBox/Clean/llvm-9999-01.roots/llvm-9999-01~obj/src/llvm/ > lib/Analysis/IPA/Andersens.cpp: > In function 'void

A debug or release build? -bw On Sep 24, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Did someone forget to check-in a patch? I'm getting this error during >> compilation on PPC: > > A recent checkout compiled fine for me (on x86). > >>

On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > A debug or release build? > > -bw Both, actually. > On Sep 24, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > >> >> On Sep 24, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Did someone forget to check-in a patch? I'm getting this error >>> during

Thanks for the replies, Daniel and Matthijs. I added some code to generate the copy constraint, which I think (in the present form) is wrong (or at best not field sensitive): +void Andersens::visitGetResultInst(GetResultInst &GR) { + if (isa<PointerType>(GR.getType())) + { + // P1 = getresult P2 --> <Copy/P1/P2> +

Hi all, I was trying to find the equivalent analysis of Andersens on LLVM. I found it only on LLVM 2.6 on 'Analysis/IPA' folder. Is it removed/renamed on later versions? I'm mostly interested in 3.4 version or later. Thank you in advance, -- Irini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello, How do apply the LLVM Andersens alias analysis direclty to a Module object. I'm trying to avoid using the PassManager. Max -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090518/aec81e30/attachment.html>

Hello, How do apply the LLVM Andersens alias analysis direclty to a Module object. I'm trying to avoid using the PassManager. Max -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090518/1a9d9a89/attachment.html>

Hello, I am researching a more efficient approach to subset-based alias analysis in the style of Andersen's algorithm, and I noticed that there used to be an implementation of that for LLVM back in 2.6 (-anders-aa) which was removed because it was "not being actively maintained and had substantial problems". I'd be interested in knowing what was wrong with it (other than

The warning is: R:\SDKs\llvm\trunk\include\llvm/ADT/SparseBitVector.h(58) : warning C4099: 'llvm::ilist_sentinel_traits<llvm::SparseBitVectorElement<ElementSize>>' : type name first seen using 'struct' now seen using 'class' R:\SDKs\llvm\trunk\include\llvm/ADT/SparseBitVector.h(275) : see reference to class template instantiation

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Points-to analysis on LLVM-IR itself is fine (see the current CFL-AA, > or the old deleted andersen's implementations), and giving may-alias > and no-alias results also works. Giving must-alias answers, however, > is difficult. > > In particular, i would not simply ignore some types of

I may have found a bug in the andersends pass, but before I try to strip the code down to something reasonable I'd like to make sure I'm not misunderstanding anything. This is against the current SVN head, on my Mac OS 10.5 box. 1) I'm compiling a bunch of C++ code with llvm-g++ (4.0.1). The compiled code includes the gcc 4.0.1 implementation for dynamic_cast (so it can be

I have a problem where I add an Andersens AA pass to the pass manager, but it appears to get invalidated by another pass, and never rerun. My understanding from reading the documentation is that when a pass gets invalidated, it should be rerun before any other passes that requires it. Here is a simple example of the problem I am seeing: PassManager passManager; passManager.add(new