similar to: [LLVMdev] CFG modifcations and code gen

On Oct 13, 2008, at 5:14 PMPDT, Villmow, Micah wrote: > As stated in an earlier email, I am working on getting break/ > continue to work correctly for my backend, but I ran into another > issue with codegen and the CFG. It seems that code gen is not done > based on the CFG, but rather on the block numbers, and the function > call MachineFunction::RenumberBlocks doesn’t

But, the branch folding pass, or whatever passes are supposed to reorder the blocks based on the CFG, are not doing so in this case. Otherwise there is no way that blocks 2 and 4 should be printing out before blocks 3 & 5. Renumber blocks just seems to reorder the values based on their pre-set block number, but when the CFG is modified these number should modified also to follow the new

Hi, I have Ubuntu with all the update and stuff... The problem I'm having is very odd.... lets use couter strike source as a example... I can get in to the game just perfect, everything loads and everything is fine.. But once i start to click on my mouse, the screen flashes white....for like 1ms.... It does it every time... It also does it in Warcraft III when it opens.. .and also it does it

My group is working with datasets between 100 Mb and 1 GB in size, using multiple log ins. From the documentation, it appears that vsize is limited to 2^30-1, which tends to prove too restrictive for our use. When we drop that restriction (set vsize = NA) we end up hanging the server, which requires a restart. Is there any way to increase the memory limits on R while keeping our jobs from

On Oct 14, 2008, at 9:16 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > But, the branch folding pass, or whatever passes are supposed to > reorder the blocks based on the CFG, are not doing so in this case. > Otherwise there is no way that blocks 2 and 4 should be printing out > before blocks 3 & 5. Renumber blocks just seems to reorder the > values based on their pre-set block number,

After a bunch more investigate, I've seem to have figured out what is going on here. The MachineFunction holds a vector of MachineBasicBlocks and it is this vector that is traversed by the MachineFunction iterator when printing out instructions. The problem is occurring when a modification to the CFG moves around so that the ordering of them is different. Even if the pred/succ blocks are

Hi Dave, It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is no succ_begin for Machine BasicBlock. I'm looking to make the CFGSuccessors and CFGPredecessors classes in CFGDiff.h templated, and this needs a common API for all types instantiations. Does this clarify your question or did I misunderstand

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:30 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:31 AM Alina Sbirlea <alina.sbirlea at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Dave, >> >> It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was >> looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is >> no

Chris, I took a look at AnalyzeBranch and I don't see how it can solve my problem. The issue itself isn't with branching, as I can handle branches fairly well in my custom pass(see the before and after dot files attached). I can take a bunch of branches and construct high level control flow for my backend since I have no ability to do goto/jump, only whileloop and ifs. So analyzing the

Hi, As part of an ongoing work to extend the GraphDiff (this models a CFG view), I came across the need to have a common interface for accessing successors/predecessors in various IR units, such that a type such as `typename NodeT::succ_iterator` could be used in templated code. In particular, the need arose for BasicBlocks, MachineBasicBlocks, VPBlockBase and clang::CFGBlock. The least invasive

It would go something like like the code below. The goal would be to turn the basic blocks which the graph looks like "...->x->y->..." where the instructions of x and y could live in the same basic block without a jump or fall through in between. bool runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &mf) { BitVector seen( mf.size() ); for( unsigned i = 0, e = mf.size();

Dear LLVM, Is there any simple way to decide whether there is a control path from one Basic Block to another Basic Block? thanks, Jerry

Has anyone written a pass at the MachineFunction level which combines machine basic blocks which is guaranteed to be the single predecessor to another block? Or is there a reason not to combine them? - Thanks Jeff Kunkel

On Oct 6, 2010, at 4:31 PM, Jeff Kunkel wrote: > Has anyone written a pass at the MachineFunction level which combines > machine basic blocks which is guaranteed to be the single predecessor > to another block? Or is there a reason not to combine them? I'm not sure exactly what transformation you're referring to, but BranchFolder::OptimizeBranches does a lot of things like that.

Hello, I've some exceptions which I would like to solve to build LLVM+Clang from source on MacOSX 10.8+. " /Users/travis/build/vpmedia/crossbridge/llvm-2.9/lib/Transforms/Utils/CodeExtractor.cpp:728:28: [0;1;31m error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'std::vector<BasicBlock *>' std::vector<BasicBlock*> Succs(succ_begin(codeReplacer), " I

For anyone to have any shot of answering your question, you need to provide more information. To start, please figure out which pass deleted the block, what does the machine function looks like before and after. Evan On Sep 19, 2008, at 4:14 PM, Edward Lee wrote: > I have a new instruction that takes 2 labels, and in SelectionDAGISel, > I have it doing

On Aug 6, 2009, at 5:45 AM, Artjom Kochtchi wrote: > So I was searching for a possibility to include an additional > (Machine)BasicBlock (or rather a MachineFunction?) somewhere in the > program > that contains the program termination and that I can jump to on check > failure. Can't I do that during a Pass in llc? If you just have a magic block of instructions you want to

Hi, What kind of C/C++ high level code can generate a computed jump, such as: jmpq *%r14 or jmpq *(%r14,%rbx,8) ? I imagine that any calls (including virtual) would use something like 'call *%r14', and the above jumps are mostly from 'switch' statements. Is this correct? Anything else? Thank you, Dan

Hello, First - Sorry for my English. My problem is, that every game that I run in Wine turns of my monitor. It say, that resolution is out of range. But when I checked monitor on windows, those resolutions worked properly. When I run game (in virtual desktop) and set resolution to 1024x768, than disable virtual desktop and again run game every thing is ok, but in this resolution game is slow. I

Acutally I mean whether we can start from a node in the graph and follow a path which might be very long, to reach another node. Is there a quick way to do that? thanks, xiaodong On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > Is there any simple way to decide whether there is a control path from one > > Basic Block to another Basic Block? > > No efficient way, but you