similar to: [LLVMdev] Seeing double

On Nov 4, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > Is there a reason that BlockExtractorPass is duplicated? See tools/ > Bugpoint/ExtractFunction.cpp and lib/Transforms/IPO/LoopExtractor.cpp. Huh, how about that. It looks like bugpoint should use the other one and drop its copy. -Chris

Hello everyone, Quick question about loop extraction in llvm. I've been using the LoopExtractor pass in llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/LoopExtractor.cpp to extract top level loops from programs. I'm wondering if extracting inner-most loops is any more complex than using the BlockExtractor pass in llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/BlockExtractor.cpp and making sure that the basic blocks in the extracted

Hi all, After updating llvm+clang to r174701 by issuing make -j8 happiness The build fails with: ... make[2]: Entering directory `/local/csaba/LLVM/build-release/tools/llvm-diff' llvm[2]: Compiling DiffConsumer.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Linking Release+Asserts executable lli (without symbols) llvm[2]: Compiling CrashDebugger.cpp for Release+Asserts build

Hi Johannes, This is very helpful and thank you for the quick response. I imagine that the usual nested loop structure is something like: loop1_header_bb bbs_between_loop1_header_and_loop2_header loop2_header_bb loop_body_bbs br loop2_header_bb instructions_before_loop1_end_and_after_loop2_end br loop1_header_bb In this case you mean that loop2_header_bb might need to be split before

Hi Everyone, Can Someone tell me all the interprocedural optimizations that LLVM 2.1 supports. Thank You, Naineet Patel CSE IITB

This is release_50 branch of git, sha1: f1d5723be3f9456a6b16cdf687847ac2918846de Using gcc 7.2.0 from homebrew. $ CC=/usr/local/opt/gcc/bin/x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0-gcc-7 CXX=/usr/local/opt/gcc/bin/x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0-g++-7 cmake .. -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/Users/andy/local/llvm5 -DCMAKE_PREFIX_PATH=/Users/andy/local/llvm5 $ make VERBOSE=1 [ 92%] Linking CXX

Hi, all. My question is about how to split one module into N modules(N >= 2)? For example, given the following code: #src.c# int main() { //......// func1(); func2(); //......// return 0; } void func1() { //......// } void func2() { //......// } func1() has no dependence with func2(), so they can perform parallel execution. And I have to split src.c into src1.c

I resend email with updated (after mass header move) log examples. > LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example, > last night tester build) > But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir > case. > gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/projects' gmake[2]: Entering directory

Hi Scott, > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > > this is indeed a miscompilation by your system compiler. However so many > > compilers miscompiled this that a workaround was committed to svn. So you > > may want to check out llvm and llvm-gcc from svn. Alternatively, maybe > > the patch applies to llvm 2.5 too.

As came up recently in other threads, loop passes really get in the way. Here are some of the ways: - There is only one Loop analysis pass - IVUsers. It seems unlikely that the loop nest walk is critical to computing this or preserving it. - Almost all of the things we think of as "required" and dependencies are actually *transforms* that canonicalize the form of a loop into particular

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > this is indeed a miscompilation by your system compiler.  However so many > compilers miscompiled this that a workaround was committed to svn.  So you > may want to check out llvm and llvm-gcc from svn.  Alternatively, maybe > the patch applies to llvm 2.5 too.  I've attached it. I will try the

Hi all, here comes the patch for the first wave of Use class size reduction. I have split it into 3 files, corresponding to - header changes - implementation changes - applications This at the moment does not contain the description how the size of the Use class will be reduced from 16 to 12 bytes, I am going to send that in a separate patch. This wave primarily consists of changes that are

LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example, last night tester build) But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir case. ======= Finished building ModuleMaker debug executable (without symbols) ======= gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/examples/ModuleMaker' gmake[1]: Leaving directory

Can someone explain what *-loop-extract* pass does with an example? Thanks, Harish C -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200817/8b4651b4/attachment.html>

Following along from lli code, if you add a call to InitializeNativeTargetAsmPrinter() during setup, it gets a bit farther and crashes rather than issuing that error. (Rebuilding with debugging symbols now to dig into it further…) -matt Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory. Reason: KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS at address: 0x0000000000000000 0x000000010000349e in

On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 00:04, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > I resend email with updated (after mass header move) log examples. > > > LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example, > > last night tester build) > > But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir > > case. I *only* build with obj dir != src dir and

On Jan 12, 2009, at 11:10, Edgar Geisler wrote: > my goal is to create a service with multiple threads, each of them > generating IR code and JIT'ing/executing it in their threads and > some threads will share generated code through a code repository... Hi Edgar, Module and Value are unsafe for concurrent access--even disjoint instances thereof. So you'll need to hold a

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Scott, > >> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> > this is indeed a miscompilation by your system compiler.  However so many >> > compilers miscompiled this that a workaround was committed to svn.  So you >> > may want to check

On Mar 26, 2014, at 6:56 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 3/26/2014 11:39 AM, İsmail Dönmez wrote: >> >> make check-all but yes make check would suffice. Thanks! > > I see two reported failures: > > > FAIL: LLVM :: BugPoint/compile-custom.ll (459 of 9992) > ******************** TEST 'LLVM ::

Hi everyone, I want to test the passes in llvm, and I got some passes sequences that caused the crash of opt. Although I can use bugpoint to narrow down the source of problems, I can only get some reduced and simplified IR and passes to reproduce the problem. My question is how to get the reduced IR of the original IR file to reproduce the problem. For example, "opt a.bc -a -b -c -d (where