similar to: [LLVMdev] why RegisterPass<TargetData> initialize itself twice in my system

On Thursday 25 February 2010 19:24:30 Trevor Harmon wrote: > Hi, > > I'm confused about the is_analysis parameter of the RegisterPass > constructor (defined in PassSupport.h). The only explanation I can > find is that is_analysis should be set to true if the pass is "an > analysis pass, for example dominator tree pass". Can someone please > clarify what is meant

Hi, I'm confused about the is_analysis parameter of the RegisterPass constructor (defined in PassSupport.h). The only explanation I can find is that is_analysis should be set to true if the pass is "an analysis pass, for example dominator tree pass". Can someone please clarify what is meant by "analysis pass"? Also -- and this is more of a C++ question than an

Hey folks, As part of our ongoing quest to eliminate static constructors from the LLVM libraries (in order to improve startup times for applications that link against them), I'm going to be eliminating the RegisterPass class. They will be replaced with an initialization-function based system that I will detail in a future email. But, for now, what you need to know is that these classes are

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 05:22:49PM -0800, Trevor Harmon wrote: > On Feb 25, 2010, at 5:45 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > > > The RegisterPass template takes care of notifying the PassManager > > that the pass exists. One of the advantages of PassManager is > > that it decouples pass execution from the rest of the infrastructure > > so the class need not be visible to

On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:42 PM, Tom Prince wrote: > You cannot refer to anything in anonymous namespace by name from > another file, however, if you have a pointer, say, then you can > still use the > pointer. Yes, that would make sense, except I don't see any pointers being passed. The relevant line in lib/Transforms/Hello.cpp is: static RegisterPass<Hello>

On Feb 25, 2010, at 5:45 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > The RegisterPass template takes care of notifying the PassManager > that the pass exists. One of the advantages of PassManager is > that it decouples pass execution from the rest of the infrastructure > so the class need not be visible to anything outside the > implementation > of the pass itself. Even though the

On Sep 30, 2013, at 10:11 PM, Dirk Schroetter <dschroetter at googlemail.com> wrote: > Folks, > > I did read the documentation but I am at a loss still. > > I do have the following: > > Pass *createFooPass (char *foo1) { > return new FooPass (foo1); > } > > static RegisterPass<FooPass> X("foo-pass", "foo", false, true); >

Folks, I did read the documentation but I am at a loss still. I do have the following: Pass *createFooPass (char *foo1) { return new FooPass (foo1); } static RegisterPass<FooPass> X("foo-pass", "foo", false, true); Where exactly do I supply the non-default crore in this example ? Thanks /Dirk

Hi, You need to initialize your pass with: INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass) INITIALIZE_PASS_END(YourPass, "your-pass", "Your Pass", /*cfgonly=*/false, /*analysis=*/false) So as to both register your pass, and have

Hi, I am trying to add alias analysis in llvm. I created a file ProfileAlias.cpp in llvm source at the place where Andersens.cpp is there. ProfileAlias.cpp does nothing at present just empty definitions of required functions. When I build llvm I get the following error: /home/ambika/llvm1/llvm-obj/Release/lib/libLLVMipa.a(ProfileAlias.o): In function `llvm::createProfileAliasPass()':

Hi, all: I wanted to use a FunctionPass (e.g. *MemoryDependenceAnalysis*) in a ModulePass, and then I used the method "getAnalysis<* MemoryDependenceAnalysis*>(llvm::Function *)" described at http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html#ModulePass to get the FunctionPass. But , it still crashed when I invoked this pass in tool 'opt'. However, if I change my pass to

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Akira, > > I found you maintain mips MipsSchedule.td. does it correct? in > MipsSchedule.td, every InstrItinData only uses one InstrStage. there's no > ByPass info out there. > are you sure this reflects the real R4xxx/R5xxx processors. > > why IILoad uses funcition unit ALU? >

Hi, there, I put roaming profiles for NT4 users on samba server. In "Domain User Manager", I set "User profile Path" \\abel\profile\%U.pds, here abel is samba server. It works well, but everyday several users complain. Sometime, they cannot login because of roaming profiles. Sometimes, some users cannot run VC or VB. Sometime, I only need to remove ntuser.dat on samba

Any chance of adding some missing test coverage here? That code was dead (& evidently untested) before... On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > I believe you are correct. Fixed thusly: > > dzur:~/sources/llvm> git svn dcommit > Committing to https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk ... > M

Hi! On 12/03/2009 07:50 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > Hello, > > Here are a few misc. comments on this patch. > > Would it make sense to mark the ProfileInfo passes as "CFGOnly?" > If so, that would let them be automatically preserved by passes > which don't modify the CFG (and that call AU.setPreservesCFG()). Yes, it would, how do I do this? :-) >> +

I tried to compile and run the code from the Kaleidescope tutorial: http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/LangImpl3.html While the compilation worked fine, the run did not. I'm using the version of llvm from svn for 12/15/09. In gdb I get this stack trace, and never see the "ready>" prompt. Apparently it's dying inside constructors in the headers somewhere. #0 0x00000036b502e21d

Hi! > I'm not sure what you mean by this new pass being of no use to other passes. > It's not generating any new information about the program (or if it is, it's > writing it to disk), so other passes wouldn't need it anyway. > So I know that I'm on the right way. I just think it's a bit of overhead implementing an own pass and register it using

On Sep 25, 2013, at 11:03 PM, Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2013, at 7:59 PM, Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Andrew, >> >> Thank you for answering my question. >> >> What's the status of

Hello, Here are a few misc. comments on this patch. Would it make sense to mark the ProfileInfo passes as "CFGOnly?" If so, that would let them be automatically preserved by passes which don't modify the CFG (and that call AU.setPreservesCFG()). > + if (ProfileInfo* PI = getAnalysisIfAvailable<ProfileInfo>()) { > + PI->splitEdge(OrigPreHeader, NewHeader,

Hi, Akira, I found you maintain mips MipsSchedule.td. does it correct? in MipsSchedule.td, every InstrItinData only uses one InstrStage. there's no ByPass info out there. are you sure this reflects the real R4xxx/R5xxx processors. why IILoad uses funcition unit ALU? InstrItinData<IILoad , [InstrStage<3, [ALU]>]> for my previous question, I have new input after