similar to: [LLVMdev] Conditional Predicate Extraction

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Conditional Predicate Extraction"

2007 Dec 19
1
[LLVMdev] Conditional Predicate Extraction
Hi all, I am working on the extraction of the conditional predicates from the basic blocks using LLVM. I have written a pass using which i am able to extract the conditional as well as unconditional branch instructions corresponding to different basic blocks. I have written a separate tool to extract the control flow graph (granularity of the level of basic blocks). Now i have to extract the
2010 Mar 06
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH]: MSVC build enhancements
Whoops, mailing list headers still broken, sending to the list this time: On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:35 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: >> So adding an option for adding this flag would be great but not changing the >> default. (The flag is interesting because it can
2009 Mar 13
0
[LLVMdev] promotion of return value.
Cedric is right, Our target, PIC16, is 8-bit and promotion to 32-bit is really bad for us... Now what exactly is going to happen once these attributes are added, depends on the target. For example, in our case, there will be no promotion on the callee side, but the caller will decide if it wants to promote or not... What will happen in general is that front-end (clang and llvm-gcc) will do the
2008 Dec 05
2
[LLVMdev] Build errors on trunk for about a week now.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > OvermindDL1 a écrit : >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:58 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:57 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1
2010 Mar 06
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH]: MSVC build enhancements
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Isaac Dupree <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote: > On 03/06/10 18:03, OvermindDL1 wrote: >> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Isaac Dupree >> <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org>  wrote: >>> >>> On 03/06/10 17:37, OvermindDL1 wrote: >>>> >>>> Whoops, mailing list headers still broken,
2008 Dec 05
0
[LLVMdev] Build errors on trunk for about a week now.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:45 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: >> should be fixed with r60590 (work for me) > > That seems to have fixed a large amount of those errors (nicely simple > fix). I went ahead and termserved into my dev box (I will not be able > to get to
2010 Mar 06
4
[LLVMdev] [PATCH]: MSVC build enhancements
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > Le 06/03/2010 11:43, José Fonseca a écrit : >> >> Attached are two patches with MSVC build enchancements. >> >> They are quite trivial, but were necessary to correctly link LLVM >> libraries with Mesa3D on Windows. >> >> Jose >> > > Are you volontary
2008 Jun 20
0
[LLVMdev] Update VS2005
Applied: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080616/063951.html Thanks Cedric! On Jun 20, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Cédric Venet wrote: > Hi, > > Last time patch contained a new file, but it seems this is not > supported so > I attached it here: > Common.vsprops => llvm/win32/ > This allow to set properties (like preprocessor definition) to all the
2008 Dec 05
2
[LLVMdev] Build errors on trunk for about a week now.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > should be fixed with r60590 (work for me) That seems to have fixed a large amount of those errors (nicely simple fix). I went ahead and termserved into my dev box (I will not be able to get to it for another day or so) and told svn to update, and cmake to make into a new directory, and build it, but it
2007 Dec 20
0
[LLVMdev] First time!
Hi aditya, There are two ways to cound the number of predecessors for each basic block. You can generate the control flow graph using the CallGraphScc pass with the granularity of basic block and can simply traverse the graph bottom up till the root. The number of nodes encountered would be the number of predecessors. The second way would be to use the special ;preds marker in the llvm IR. Each
2008 Oct 23
1
[LLVMdev] Helping the optimizer along (__assume)
Kenneth Boyd a écrit : > Cédric Venet wrote: >> you never seen assert(0 && "Not yet implemented"); ? >> You may want to compile a program like this :) >> > As I see it, under the proposed extension a compile-time false constant > would error "if the code commits to executing it". > > Heuristically, something like > > void
2012 Aug 07
1
samber server in openvz container - venet oder veth0?
I'm new to the list. hopefully my question is correctly placed here... I'd installed my samba server 3.5.6 on debian squeeze in a openvz container that uses venet. I'd love to keep it that way but I'm not sure if that is ok. Do you use samba server with venet or do I have to change to veth? I already read http://wiki.openvz.org/Differences_between_venet_and_veth and I don't
2008 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] Helping the optimizer along (__assume)
Cédric Venet wrote: >> Technically, yes, but we can reword future standards to have the >> latitude to give compilation errors for conditions that can be proved >> to be false, then the implementation is conforming. We could always >> have a flag to control the behavior if people want/need it, though, I >> can't hardly see why they'd want it to
2009 Aug 27
0
[LLVMdev] inlining hint
On Aug 27, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Cédric Venet wrote: > David Vandevoorde a écrit : >> >> I don't think those are _good_ reasons though: If one doesn't want >> a C+ + function to be inlined, one shouldn't define it inline. >> >> > > You must not have written a lot of C++ template then. (Ha!) > You don't have the choice in this case, just
2008 Nov 01
8
OpenVZ & shorewall. Did'nt work acl based on ip range.
Hello all, It''s my first letter on this list, and, my English is not very well. Please take me indulgence for grammar/syntax and over erorrs :)) I have trouble for acl''s of ip range. But, acl for one host (with ip adress) work fine. Please help me for make work acl/find erorr in acl. Becouse I''m new shorewall user, I maked test configuration on Virtual Mashine
2008 Jan 23
1
[LLVMdev] Walking all the predecessors for a basic block
Hi, Well, yes i did try your suggestion but i keep on running into a compilation problem. The error is: llvm[0]: Compiling Hello.cpp for Release build (PIC) /home/saraswat/llvm/llvm-2.1/include/llvm/ADT/GraphTraits.h: In instantiation of `llvm::GraphTraits<llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock> >': Hello.cpp:59: instantiated from here
2015 Jul 20
0
Postdoctoral Position in Biostatistics/Bioinformatics
Job Title : Postdoctoral Position in Biostatistics/Bioinformatics Background The joint research unit between bioM?rieux, international leader in in vitro diagnostic, and Hospices Civils de Lyon, second-largest University Hospital Network in France, develops a research program dedicated to the study of injury induced immunosuppression. This program aims at (i) describing and understanding the
2009 Aug 27
3
[LLVMdev] inlining hint
David Vandevoorde a écrit : > On Aug 27, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Cédric Venet wrote: > > >> David Vandevoorde a écrit : >> >>> I don't think those are _good_ reasons though: If one doesn't want >>> a C+ + function to be inlined, one shouldn't define it inline. >>> >>> >>> >> You must not have written a
2007 Nov 13
0
[LLVMdev] DISerializer question
Hi, I am trying to add debugging information to a front-end. Following the example off llvm-gcc, I pretty much understood how MachineModuleInfo work but I have a question about the lifetime of the debug object. >From the implementation of DISerialiser, It seems to me I need to keep all my debug information object alive until the end of the compilation unit (until the
2008 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] Extraction of constant operands from the instruction
Hi all, I am trying to extract the operands from an instruction, for that i am iterating over the operand list as defined by the user class. for (User::op_iterator O = i->op_begin() ;O != i->op_end(); ++O) { Value *v = *O; llvm::cout << v->getNameStr() ; } However, whenever there is a constant operand like a numerical value, it does not displays any value at all, i checked