similar to: [LLVMdev] where's UnrollLoop.h

Hi All, the attached patch performs the splitting in the proposed manner. before applying the patch, please execute svn cp lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnroll.cpp lib/Transforms/Utils/UnrollLoop.cpp to make the patch apply and preserve proper history. Transforms/Utils/UnrollLoop.cpp contains the unrollLoop function, which is now used by the LoopUnroll pass. I've also moved the

SimplifyLibCalls.cpp is no longer part of Transforms\IPO and Transforms\Scalar\SimplifyCFG.cpp is renamed to SimplifyCFG.cpp or something to that effect ( I didn't look up the actual checkins ). Having fixed that, I still can't get through the build: Creating library C:\work\s\llvm\win32\\bin\Win32\Debug/opt.lib and object C:\work\s\llvm\win32\\bin\Win32\Debug/opt.exp 1>opt.obj : error

Hello Matthijs, Separating mechanism from policy is a good thing for the LoopUnroll pass. Instead of moving the policy to a subclass though, I think it'd be better to move the mechanism, the unrollLoop function, out to be a standalone utility function, with the LoopInfo object passed in explicitly. FoldBlockIntoPredecessor would also be good to make into a standalone utility function, since

Hello Matthijs, On May 9, 2008, at 3:47 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi All, > > the attached patch performs the splitting in the proposed manner. > before applying the patch, please execute > svn cp lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnroll.cpp lib/Transforms/Utils/ > UnrollLoop.cpp > to make the patch apply and preserve proper history. > > Transforms/Utils/UnrollLoop.cpp

> Is it reasonable to ask Yes, it's reasonable. Moreover, I'd be content with a build system that doesn't use MSVS IDE at all. If the build system could be parameterized to use microsoft cl compiler (cygwin gcc is useless for my purposes), e.g. something like in Boost project, I'd be more than happy to never care about VS project files. Yet, I want to limit my involvement

Hi, On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander at nomadiclab.com> wrote: >  Would the best way be to add an option to -loop-unroll, and hack away at lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopUnroll.cpp? Instead, the better alternative is to write another pass similar to LoopUnrollPass.cpp (say LoopPeelPass.cpp) and add new option -loop-peel. The new pass could use llvm::UnrollLoop()

Hi all, I'm attempting to perform loop unrolling on a single function using the C++ API. Maybe I missed something in the docs, but I cannot figure out a way to do this. The function I'm working with is very simple, containing a single for loop and not much else. I compiled the function to IR using clang with no optimizations enabled. My initial plan was to first run the IndVarSimplify

Hi all, I have tried to use the loop-unroll pass on a large example, but without success. So I have tried on smaller examples, and I did not get more success. My simplest example is attached. It comes from this C code (using llvm-gcc, but similar result with clang): int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { int i; for (i = 0; i!=5; ++i) {} return 0; } I use this command (version 2.8svn, from

The loop rotation pass does modify the function, which I'm guessing means that a FunctionPassManager can be used to run LoopPasses (this is not obvious to me after looking through the FunctionPassManager code). Unfortunately none of the other passes I'm using (ScalarEvolution, LCSSA, IndVarSimplify, and LoopUnroll) appear to have an effect. I verified that the function can be loop

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 Dan, > This should still make it easy to write new unrolling passes with > custom heuristics, but it would also be more flexible for passes to > do unrolling in combination with other transformations. Agreed. To shed some light on my specific requirements, I am working with an architecture that has only limited support for loops and control flow. This means that loop unrolling is not

If you look at an .sln file, there's a long sequence of digits associated with every project, something like this 8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942. For the lack of a better word I called it "encoding". After I changed the dependencies between projects in the solution, msvs replaced those numeric sequences by new ones literally for every project in the solution file. The diff now

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

[I am a newcomer to llvm, so don't believe me.] Hi Claude, I added -debug to the command line in an attempt to study your example, and got out this: Loop Unroll: F[main] Loop %bb1 Loop Size = 4 Can't unroll; loop not terminated by a conditional branch. The source code for that is on line 116 (or so) in lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopUnroll.cpp Based on a quick look at the source code,

Hello. I'm getting the following error after adding some extra instrumentation in a module (LoopVectorize.cpp ) due to a bug in Value::replaceAllUsesWith (see more comments of mine below): Value::replaceAllUsesWith(New = i16* inttoptr (i16 51 to i16*)), this = %VectorGep = getelementptr i16, i16* inttoptr (i16 51 to i16*), <128 x i64> zeroinitializer, !dbg !17 ; this

I am working on heavily optimising unusually static C++ code, and have encountered a situation where I basically want an optimiser that would speculatively unroll a loop to see if the first round of the loop could be optimised further. (I happen to know that it is possible.) The previous optimisations that produce the loop in the first place already do a magical job (relying heavily on constant

Hi, the attached patch splits the loop unroll pass into a LoopUnroll superclass that implements the unrolling mechanism, and a SimpleLoopUnroll subclass implementing the current policy. This split is modeled after the split between Inliner and SimpleInliner. The superclass currently still finds out the TripCount and TripMultiple, and passes those, together with the Loop in question, to a policy

Hi Dmitri, I know what you are saying, but in the end I think we are lucky if diffs against project files have any meaningful information. Nobody right now assumes responsibility for regularly updating the VS files, so we routinely get patches from different people when they decide to upgrade the project files, and these patches change the .sln files in arbitrary ways. If you have

Hi, please find an updated patch attached that incorporates the (trivial) changes introduced by r50696 and which makes this patch apply cleanly again. Gr. Matthijs -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: split-unroll.diff Type: text/x-diff Size: 14660 bytes Desc: not available URL:

Ted, Thanks for taking care of this. I found that in order to build clang (in addition to the vcproj changes I posted earlier today) I had to add a dependency such that the clangDriver project depends on the CodeGen (basically the CodeGen checkbox has to be checked in the list of the clangDriver's dependencies). This in effect adds codegen.lib to the list of libraries linked into clang.exe