similar to: [LLVMdev] JIT Stub Problem

I'm trying to come up with a simple example of using ICmpInst in a Pass. On each of the branches(true, false) I'd like to call a separate function and then resume(to the code that was already there). In this example i is a inst_iterator to Instruction the Pass is currently on. Now it segfaults opt before I can even get a dump() on it. Does anyone see what I am doing wrong? BasicBlock

Hi All, I’m currently working on a simple task which needs to transform loops into tail-recursive functions. I found the CodeExtractor class a handy helper to use, but later encountered a problem. Consider the following CU struct S { int a, b; }; int foo(struct S *s, unsigned n) {   struct S *next = s;   unsigned i;   for (i = 0; i < n; ++i) {     if (!s[i].a)      

Hello all; I have been writing this LLVM pass that extracts loops in a function and then duplicates the function so the loop is executed twice. The pass executes fine but the produced bit code does not behave correctly as it should (both the original and duplicated function in which the loop is extracted is called, but from the output it seems only one of them is executed.) Here is the source:

I guess I didn't have a clear question. Suppose we have BB1 and BB2 both point to BB3. BB1 has variable x. BB2 also as variable x. BB3 will have PHINode for x with 2 value from BB1 and BB2. BB1 BB2 \ / BB3 Now if BB1 and BB2 is extracted into a function (using ExtractCodeRegion), they will be replaced by a basic block called codeRepl (which has a call to the extracted

Hi all, I have problem with ExtractCodeRegion (CodeExtractor.cpp). My original program is as follows. bb: ... %tmp.15 = load %struct.MYSQL_ROWS** %3, align 4 ... bb1: ... %tmp.1 = load %struct.MYSQL_ROWS** %6, align 4 ... bb4: ; preds = %bb1, %bb, %entry %tmp.0 = phi %struct.MYSQL_ROWS* [ null, %entry ], [ %tmp.15, %bb ], [ %tmp.1, %bb1 ]

In a pass I would like to insert a ICmpInst/BranchInst pair to check if 2 GlobalVariables are equal or not. If they are not I would like to call a function. I've tried splitting the current block and then inserting before the existing instructions, but for some reason this seems to ruin the iterator(i). What is the correct way todo something like this? void checkShadowPtr(Module &M,

On 01/26/2011 07:50 PM, Vu Le wrote: > I guess I didn't have a clear question. > > Suppose we have BB1 and BB2 both point to BB3. > BB1 has variable x. BB2 also as variable x. > BB3 will have PHINode for x with 2 value from BB1 and BB2. > BB1 BB2 > \ / > BB3 > > Now if BB1 and BB2 is extracted into a function > (using ExtractCodeRegion), they

Hi Tobias, If the PHI node at exit block of region R has multiple inputs from the R, I split the exit block into 2. The first block contains all PHI nodes whose input are all from the region. The second is the new exit node. All branches (outside R) to the old exit now point the new exit. All regions whose exit is the old exit are also updated with the new exit node. It works like a charm.

Hi, I have a question about ExtractLoop() in CodeExtractor.cpp. The sample code is a simple list traversal, as attached. The generated bitcode (from llvm-gcc -O1) is shown below. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- define i32 @walk(%struct.node2* %list2) nounwind { entry: %0 = icmp eq

Hi, I use the llvm::ExtractCodeRegion to extract each loop into a separate function, but I have a problem when I run this on the SPEC CPU 2006 on the 401.bzip2 benchmark. First I use clang -O3 to generate optimized llvm code and then I extract some loops from the module built from blocksort.c source file. The problem is that the PHI nodes contained in the successors of the codeRepl

Hi Dmitry, [FORTRAN code] > The difference between two versions is only in the way how inner > reduction loop is implemented. In first case it is explicit and in > second case - uses sum intrinsic, which is lowered to plain code by > DragonEgg. In first case Polly successfully detects parallel outer > loop, in second case - it can't. Thanks for the test

Hi, Here's another case, different in high-level, but similar in low-level. When Fortran allocatable array is defined in module, its actual dimensions are kept in internal structure. Loads originated from reading these dimensions confuse Polly on any use of this array. Attachments: 1) Sample Fortran source code (to be compiled with and without -DMODULE to see failing and working version,

Oops, sorry for the message title, making it more descriptive now... 2013/2/3 Dmitry Mikushin <dmitry at kernelgen.org> > Dear all, > > Yesterday, from the customer's code I observed relatively simple case, > where Polly is unable to detect parallelizable outer loop. Consider two > versions of Fortran routine: > > 1) > > subroutine filter(H, szh, X, szx, Y,

Tom, I think it might be productive to fork this thread to discuss making the requirements for upstreaming a new LLVM target more explicit and open. I'd also like to gauge interest in an idea I've discussed privately with a few community members, namely the concept of having a semi-official "incubation" system whereby proposed backends could get a trial run before becoming part