similar to: [LLVMdev] malloc() vs. MallocInst

Torvald, For what are you interested in poolalloc? I'm asking because we are trying to decide how to prioritize work on it. Thanks, --Vikram http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~vadve http://llvm.org On Oct 27, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote: > Hi, > > I recently looked quite some time for why poolalloc wouldn't > transform calls > to malloc() in my program, until I

Hi Vikram, I want to use poolalloc as a means for partitioning memory in Software Transactional Memory. We will have a paper about tuning parameters in word-based STMs in PPoPP 08, but there we use one configuration for the complete TM, which obviously has limitations in heterogenous workloads. Partitioning with poolalloc should give me (1) hopefully meaningful partitions (ie,

Hello, have a short look at the following simple c-prog: #include <stdlib.h> int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { void* buf = malloc(10 * sizeof(char*)); /* do sth with buf, so that it is not "optimized away" */ return 0; } When you compile this using a plain llvm-gcc, the call to libc-malloc is left inside.But compiling it with -O2 alters the call to llvm::MallocInst. Now

Dear Staff, I am reading the paper "Making Context-sensitive Points-to Analysis with Heap Cloning Practical For The Real World", and I build the poolalloc module, and run the program in Figure 1 in this paper with -ds-aa alias analysis. Now I know that X and Y in the program would have distinct PoolDescriptors to make them disjoint data structures. However, how can we

On Thursday 11 June 2009 18:14:08 John Criswell wrote: > If your use of pool allocation requires that you can always get the pool > handle for a pointer, you need to make sure that pool allocation is > configured so that it doesn't generate the above scenario. I think > there is an option to make all pools be global pools. Some time ago, I used AnalysisUsage's

Hi, I see sth that to me looks like a JIT bug. The program is the KMeans benchmark from the STAMP benchmark suite (http://stamp.stanford.edu). Overwrite ./common/Defines.common.mk with the attached files to make CC/LD customizable. in ./kmeans, for ./kmeans -m40 -n40 -t0.00001 -i inputs/random-n65536-d32-c16.txt -p 1 : make -f Makefile.seq clean CC='llvm-gcc' LD='llvm-gcc

On Friday 08 May 2009, hc2428 at columbia.edu wrote: > Dear Staff, > I am reading the paper "Making Context-sensitive Points-to > Analysis with Heap Cloning Practical For The Real World", and I build > the poolalloc module, and run the program in Figure 1 in this paper > with -ds-aa alias analysis. Now I know that X and Y in the program > would have distinct

Would it be possible to keep get() unchanged, with a default behaviour, plus a warning? Otherwise everybody (assuming everybody gets type void*) will have to update their LLVM passes, and either maintain two versions of the passes or require their clients to use a certain LLVM version. Then passes could be "address-space-safe" or not. If the default parameter value for get() could

Torvald Riegel wrote: > On Thursday 11 June 2009 18:14:08 John Criswell wrote: > >> If your use of pool allocation requires that you can always get the pool >> handle for a pointer, you need to make sure that pool allocation is >> configured so that it doesn't generate the above scenario. I think >> there is an option to make all pools be global pools.

On Monday 17 December 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote: > On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:22 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote: > > Would it be possible to keep get() unchanged, with a default > > behaviour, plus > > a warning? Otherwise everybody (assuming everybody gets type void*) > > will > > have to update their LLVM passes, and either maintain two versions > > of the >

Are you really running the JIT? IT seems like you are just using the static compiler. Unless the code is using some idiom that we happen to miss badly, it's uncommon to see this kind of performance issue. What's the optimization level you are building the benchmark at? Anyway, please file a bug about the performance issues. If the source code is freely available, someone can

Hi, I'm currently implementing some optimization passes for LLVM and I came across a problem. I'm new to LLVM so if this question has been asked before please kindly tell me where can I find the answer. There are 2 types of AllocationInst - Alloca and Malloc. But most of the time from the compiled byte code I can only find the Alloca statement (actually I never come across a

On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:22 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote: > Would it be possible to keep get() unchanged, with a default > behaviour, plus > a warning? Otherwise everybody (assuming everybody gets type void*) > will > have to update their LLVM passes, and either maintain two versions > of the > passes or require their clients to use a certain LLVM version. AFAIK API

On Tuesday 13 July 2010 19:48:25 you wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Torvald Riegel > > I thought that the layout of structs was supposed to be preserved (wrong > > assumption?). Otherwise, any ideas why this happens? > > It should be preserved in general; Is this a "should" or a "must"? Are there any cases in which structure layout must be

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Torvald Riegel <torvald at se.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: > On Tuesday 13 July 2010 19:48:25 you wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Torvald Riegel >> > I thought that the layout of structs was supposed to be preserved (wrong >> > assumption?). Otherwise, any ideas why this happens? >> >> It should be preserved in

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Torvald Riegel > <torvald at se.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: >> On Tuesday 13 July 2010 19:48:25 you wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Torvald Riegel >>> > I thought that the layout of structs was supposed to be preserved (wrong

Hi, I am trying to use the poolallocator. More specific, I am trying to play around with the pointer compression pass. Though, I get assertion failures for the pass dependencies. This is when it in PointerCompress::getAnalysisUsage tries to register the the BU pass as required. I.e. when AU.addRequired<CompleteBUDataStructures>(); is called. $ opt -f -load

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Torvald Riegel >> <torvald at se.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: >>> On Tuesday 13 July 2010 19:48:25 you wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:09

Hi, llvm-gcc of LLVM 2.5 seems to ignore function attributes of template functions. For example, it doesn't set the noinline attribute, and it doesn't warn on unknown attribute names. Is this known / intended behavior? Thanks, Torvald

Hi all, I too am getting this error for x86_64 when I am trying to use the Data Structure Analysis ...I svn upped both the llvm main branch and the poolalloc today in the morning and recompiled everything from scratch : $ opt -load /home/pprabhu/llvm/llvm-install-x86-64/lib/libpoolalloc.so -ds-aa < o.bc opt: /home/pprabhu/llvm/llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:1418: virtual void