similar to: [LLVMdev] Setting how aggressive the inliner is in 2.1

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Robert Zeh wrote: > Is there a way to set how aggressive the inliner pass > (createFunctionInliningPass) without going through the command line > interface? Nope. Well, you could call cl::ParseCommandLine yourself (passing in a static array) like llvm-gcc does, but other than that "no". > Is there any reason InlineLimit isn't an argument to the

I think this will do the trick: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: inliner.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2654 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080111/18fad7e6/attachment.obj> -------------- next part -------------- Robert On Jan 8, 2008, at 3:26 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:

If I activate the Inliner pass: Builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(Threshold); this is the result: LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'llvm.lifetime.start' which could not be resolved! It happens on almost all my test cases, even at -O0. This JIT compiler does the same as `opt' wrt optimization passes. I'm using a LLVM snapshot from approx 4 months ago.

Hello Eli. Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: >> If I activate the Inliner pass: >> >>    Builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(Threshold); >> >> this is the result: >> >> LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'llvm.lifetime.start' which could not be resolved! >> >> It happens on almost all my test

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > If I activate the Inliner pass: > >    Builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(Threshold); > > this is the result: > > LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'llvm.lifetime.start' which could not be resolved! > > It happens on almost all my test cases, even at -O0. >

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> writes: >>> If I activate the Inliner pass: >>> >>>    Builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(Threshold); >>> >>> this is the result: >>> >>> LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'llvm.lifetime.start' which could not be resolved! >>> >>> It happens on almost

Hi! My llvm version is 3.0 release. I have a module generated by clang. When I optimize it, I first add an inlining pass (llvm::createFunctionInliningPass), then these passes: - own FunctionPass - llvm::createPromoteMemoryToRegisterPass - llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass - llvm::createDeadInstEliminationPass - llvm::createDeadStoreEliminationPass - new llvm::DominatorTree() - new

I am using llvm for source-to-source inlining. So I did: % llvm-gcc file_a.c file_b.c ... file_n.c -o file % opt -inline -inline-threshold=1000 < file.bc | llc -march=c > outfile.c Can anyone tell me how llvm determines if a function should be inlined, and what roll does "inline-threshold" play ? (Does the example mean that if the function body has fewer than 1000 instructions,

On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:32:39PM -0500, Long Fei wrote: > I am using llvm for source-to-source inlining. So I did: > > % llvm-gcc file_a.c file_b.c ... file_n.c -o file > % opt -inline -inline-threshold=1000 < file.bc | llc -march=c > outfile.c > > Can anyone tell me how llvm determines if a function should be > inlined, and what roll does

Hi! I'm using clang/llvm 3.0 release and I have a module that is generated by clang with some functions declared as inline. after inlining (llvm::createFunctionInliningPass) I'd like to remove the functions that were inlined. how can this be done? surprisingly they are removed if a print pass (llvm::createPrintModulePass) is present. is there an explanation for this? -Jochen

Hello, I trying TSAN on Darwin on LLVM itself (sanitizing multi-threaded ThinLTO link). However I see two main issues on my debug build: 1) Statistics: the pre/post increment is not safe, it seems to be acknowledge in the code itself: // FIXME: This function and all those that follow carefully use an // atomic operation to update the value safely in the presence of // concurrent

Ok, well, I seem to have pinpointed the cause of the problem more accurately. I'm running some optimization passes on my module after I compile each function in my scripting language (functions can be compiled at various times, when scripts are loaded). Now it seems these optimization passes will prune some of the native C++ functions I'm registering in my module (the functions that

Hi, We want to apply the deepest possible inlining to the target code. Looks like builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(2000); does the sufficient inlining, but what would be the best value for threshold here? Apparently, builder.Inliner = createFunctionInliningPass(numeric_limits<int>::max()); gives less inlining, that 2000. Thanks, - D.

Nyx wrote: > Ok, well, I seem to have pinpointed the cause of the problem more accurately. > I'm running some optimization passes on my module after I compile each > function in my scripting language (functions can be compiled at various > times, when scripts are loaded). Now it seems these optimization passes will > prune some of the native C++ functions I'm registering in

Hi, I'm Ryo Ota. I'm using LLVM 3.8.1. I have a quesion about inlining function in C++ API. I'd like to inline some functions in a module in the same way as `opt -inline` command. But my C++ code didn't work what I want to do. For example, by using `opt -inline` command,`main.ll` is converted into the `inlined.ll`(`opt` command worked what I want to do) [main.ll (Not inlined)]

LLVM's internal command line library needs to evolve. We have an immediate need to build LLVM as a library free of static initializers, but before brute-force fixing this problem, I'd like outline the incremental steps that will lead to a desirable long term solution. We want infrastructure in place to provide an evolutionary path. In the near term, clients who need llvm-the-library with

Hi, Until recently I've been building LLVM with SHARED_LIBRARY=1. However, sith current svn, build now fails with unresolved symbols building opt. I've done a clean checkout, configure and make so it's not down to any local changes I've made. I'm building with: ./configure --enable-assertions \ --enable-expensive-checks=no \ --enable-pic \ --enable-targets=host-only \

Hi, How can I dynamically change the code generation optimization level (e.g., None) of a JIT in other to recompile a function with a new optimization level (e.g., Default)? Thank you. Best regards, Nurudeen.

And how about this one so as not to include a C specific header in llvm-backend (!!!) and not to have llvm-backend use a C specific flag (flag_no_builtin)? Index: gcc-4.2.llvm/gcc/c-opts.c =================================================================== --- gcc-4.2.llvm.orig/gcc/c-opts.c 2008-07-30 21:25:28.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc-4.2.llvm/gcc/c-opts.c 2008-07-30 21:26:17.000000000 +0200 @@

In my project I have a group of foreign types (C++ classes) that I want to use, but don't want to represent as structs within LLVM. For example, for each field in each C++ class I have a setter and getter function that I'd like to use. The setters and getters are "extern C" functions to avoid problems with C++'s name mangling. After going over the documentation it