similar to: [LLVMdev] Requiring dynamically loaded passes

On Dec 4, 2007, at 11:24, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Is it possible to AddRequired<...> a pass that is dynamically > loaded? This would be very convenient for a course project but the > documentation about pass interactions says nothing about dynamically > loaded passes and vice versa. > > More specifically, to refer to the pass name in AddRequired, I need > to

Dear guys, I need help fixing a little piece of code. I have a pass that I really want to execute after the TwoAddressinstructionPass. But if I write "AU.addRequiredID(TwoAddressInstructionPassID);" in my pass' getAnalysisUsage, I end up getting the infamous: PassManagerT.h:387: failed assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P) &&

Dear guys, I have updated my LLVM to the top of CVS, and now I am getting errors like this one below when I write new passes: "llc: PassManagerT.h:387: void llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Pass*) [with Trait = llvm::FTraits]: Assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P) && dynamic_cast<ImmutablePass*>(getAnalysisOrNullUp(P)) &&

Hello, I wrote my own pass which needs to do some loop unrolling. I can perform loop unrolling via opt: opt -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll -unroll-count=50 mytest.bc -o mytest.bc This command works perfectly. However, what I really want is to produce the **same behavior** but from my own pass (i.e., I don't want to use opt). I wrote a Module pass which

Hi, I notice that there are several different methods called inside getAnalysisUsage(). The parameters of addRequiredID and addPreservedID are passID. What is the difference between Required and Preserved? There are also function named addRequired<PassName>() called. What is the difference between addRequired<PassName>() and addRequiredID(PassID)? Thanks a lot! Best,

On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:04 AM, Jorge Navas <navas at comp.nus.edu.sg> wrote: > > Hello, > > I wrote my own pass which needs to do some loop unrolling. > > I can perform loop unrolling via opt: > > opt -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll > -unroll-count=50 mytest.bc -o mytest.bc > > This command works perfectly. > >

Hi all, Why are these two passes conflicting: UnifyFunctionExitNodes and LowerSwitch? AU.addRequired(LowerSwitchID) works, so does AU.addRequired<unifyFunctionExitNodes>(), but the two together don't... opt: PassManagerT.h:387: void llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, llvm::Pass*) [with Trait = llvm::MTraits]: Assertion `getAnalysisOrNullUp(P)

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > I have updated my LLVM to the top of CVS, and now I am getting > errors like this one below when I write new passes: What does your getAnalysisUsage method look like? -Chris > "llc: PassManagerT.h:387: void > llvm::PassManagerT<Trait>::markPassUsed(const llvm::PassInfo*, > llvm::Pass*) [with Trait =

Hi, I'm writing a function pass which is dynamically loaded by opt and I need some analysis and passes to be run before my pass: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>(); AU.addPreserved<LoopInfo>(); AU.addRequiredID(LoopSimplifyID); AU.addPreservedID(LoopSimplifyID);

Hello, I wrote my own pass which needs to do some loop unrolling. I can perform loop unrolling via opt: opt -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa -loop-unroll -unroll-count=50 mytest.bc -o mytest.bc This command works perfectly. However, what I really want is to produce the **same behavior** but from my own pass (i.e., I don't want to use opt). I wrote a Module pass which

Hi again, I come back to this issue with an example. It's a pass which does nothing but throw the 'Unable to schedule' error. namespace { struct MyPass : public FunctionPass { static char ID; // Pass identification, replacement for typeid MyPass() : FunctionPass(ID) { initializeMyPassPass(*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry()); } virtual void

> > I have updated my LLVM to the top of CVS, and now I am getting > > errors like this one below when I write new passes: > > What does your getAnalysisUsage method look like? > Chris, I think I've figured the problem out. I have a very basic question though. What is the difference between addRequired, and addRequiredID? For instance, in RegAllocLocal.cpp, you

On 4/12/12 3:32 AM, Ivan Llopard wrote: > Hi again, > > I come back to this issue with an example. It's a pass which does > nothing but throw the 'Unable to schedule' error. > > namespace { > struct MyPass : public FunctionPass { > static char ID; // Pass identification, replacement for typeid > MyPass() : FunctionPass(ID) { >

I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this : virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.setPreservesCFG(); AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();

Hello, I have discovered a situation in which the pass manager will infinite loop. The minimal test case is below this message. The required structure of these passes is; Before requires CallGraph After requires LoopSimplify and Before I can observe this through opt: opt -load ./libBug.so -after input.bc -o output.bc I built my copy of llvm from svn revision 68820 using gcc 4.1.2 Any

Just noticed that quite a few passes like LoopSimplify are implemented in a single .cpp file ... this makes it impossible to specify LoopSimplify using the "addRequired" method. Was there any particular reason to do it this way? I wouldn't mind doing the splitting myself, though I am not using the CVS versions right now. Also, it would be nice to have support for some sort of a

Hi All, I tried to use CallGraph in llvm by adding "AU.addRequired<CallGraph>();" in getAnalysisUsage function. But it reports an error: include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h:56:39: error: ‘ID’ is not a member of ‘llvm::CallGraph’ return addRequiredID(PassClass::ID); How to use it correctly? Thanks, Haopeng

Hi, Devang Patel wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Andreas Neustifter > <astifter-llvm at gmx.at> wrote: > >> Okay, so the ProfileInfoLoader is working, but when I examine the executions more closely I see that the ProfileInfo generated by the ProfileInfoLoader is immediately discarded, when the SelectionDAGISel kicks in the "No Profile Info"-Implementation

Hi, I found an existing pass "CalledValuePropagation" that can solve the problem I raised a few days ago regarding the "callees" metadata ( https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/llvm-dev/yjtZVMH_aC4). Now I have difficulty in calling this pass in my own pass. In my own pass, I called "getAnalysis<CalledValuePropagationPass>()" and in the

On 6/5/12 10:39 AM, Ralf Karrenberg wrote: > Hi John, > > On 6/5/12 4:31 PM, John Criswell wrote: >> On 4/12/12 3:32 AM, Ivan Llopard wrote: >>> Hi again, >>> >>> I come back to this issue with an example. It's a pass which does >>> nothing but throw the 'Unable to schedule' error. >>> >>> namespace { >>>