similar to: [LLVMdev] Passes dependencies?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Passes dependencies?"

2009 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] Passes dependencies?
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org> wrote: > I was reading this page: > http://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html > > and there seems to be lots of passes that depend on others to produce > consistent non-redundant code. > > For instance, the DIE must run after Simple constant propagation, > Loop-Closed SSA Form Pass is mostly (only)
2010 Sep 21
2
[LLVMdev] IR type safety
On 21 September 2010 17:48, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > In the combined llvm IR, @p3 and @p won't match as expected. Hi Devang, That's not quite what I was thinking... Maybe I explained badly... Imagine this: -- a.ll -- %struct.x = type { i32, i32 } %a = call void @func (%struct.x %b) -- b.ll -- %struct.y = type { i32, i32 } declare i32 @func (%struct.y)
2010 Jul 13
2
[LLVMdev] Debugging docs wrong?
http://llvm.org/docs/SourceLevelDebugging.html#ccxx_compile_units !1 = metadata !{ i32 524329, ;; Tag metadata !"MySource.cpp", metadata !"/Users/mine/sources", metadata !3 ;; Compile unit } !2 is the Compile Unit, right? !3 is also wrong. -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at
2009 Dec 17
2
[LLVMdev] Automatic Vectorization
Hi all, I've sent it as a reply to another thread, but it was ill placed. Anyway, sorry about the duplication, but here it goes. I've been looking into the loop passes and noticed we do alias analysis and scalar evolution only, trying to clean up the loop as far as possible. I suppose that, if we were to define SCCs, split them into groups and re-arranging into multiple loops, we would
2010 Sep 07
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn, > (...) > > false /* isDefinition */, > (...) > > Hi Talin, > > The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only
2010 Jul 14
2
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
Hi All, Is there any documentation on how to use DIFactory to generate basic debug info? It seems similar enough to IRBuilder but working with objects (rather than pointers) and that's raising some issues. Also, am I supposed to run the ModuleDebugInfoPrinterPass manually, or it gets printed automatically when I WriteBitcodeToFile? -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim
2011 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
Seems the last use of DIFactory in LLVM/Clang is in: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp to get the enums llvm::DIFactory::OpDeref and llvm::DIFactory::OpPlus. Shouldn't this be moved to DIBuilder and remove the dependency completely? -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
2009 Nov 05
3
[LLVMdev] create dummy function
Thank you very much for you help, Renato! I read through paper you referred and also this document - http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial1.html Following these instructions to create successful function I run into some problems: 1) llvm::getGlobalContext() does not exists anymore? "llvm/LLVMContext.h" too? 2) creating instance of IRBuilder don't require template (from tutorial
2010 Jul 14
3
[LLVMdev] DIFactory
On 14 July 2010 18:21, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > Use Create* methods to create basic debug info. There is not any > tutorial document explaining how to generated basic debug info. I got that far... ;) I could prepare a how-to when I'm finished, if that interests you. > It is encapsulating how debug info is encoded. Earlier it was using >
2010 May 06
1
[LLVMdev] Auto-Vectorization in LLVM
On 6 May 2010 05:34, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On May 5, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Rajkishore Barik wrote: >> I would also like to know if there is any progress/future plans to >> include this >> in the main trunk? > > Unfortunately, nothing came of this project AFAIK, maybe Devang knows more. I looked for it and couldn't find any, too. I found
2009 Nov 05
2
[LLVMdev] create dummy function
Hello, I have a simple question. How to create "dummy" function which will have no functionality behind (return nothing and do nothing)? Currently I'm trying to do this: llvm::Constant* c = Module.getOrInsertFunction("dummy", FunctionThatNeedsToBeReplaced.getFunctionType()); llvm::Function* dummy = llvm::cast<llvm::Function>(c); This way I create new function that
2010 Nov 24
1
[LLVMdev] Wiki to HTML docs - take 2
Hi all, I spend the last two weeks looking for solutions to print HTML files out of the wiki format. I tried to create a Perl hack (wasn't generic enough), a C++ parser/printer (would take too long) and looked into Deplate and some Wikimedia specific tools to convert to docbook, pdf and HTML. The last one was the most successful one (printed a nice PDF) but the XHTML was no good for Chrome
2010 Sep 26
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM Exception Handling
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 26 September 2010 18:56, Nathan Jeffords <blunted2night at gmail.com> > wrote: > > The syntax for the invoke instruction is a little misleading. %x is a > value > > that is being generated by the instruction, not passed to is. It is no > > different in that regard as to
2010 Aug 31
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Debug information on multiple files
On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:15 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 26 August 2010 09:32, Krister Wombell <kuwerty at gmail.com> wrote: >> I've also been looking at debugging with ELF and noticed the same problem as >> Renato. I just sent a patch to llvmcommits that fixes the problem. >> DW_at_stmt_list needs to emit a label(and therefore a relocation) for the >> offset
2010 Sep 21
3
[LLVMdev] IR type safety
On 21 September 2010 18:39, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: > Type names don't have meaning.  If you want this not to happen, you > can generate a different opaque type for each type in your language to > prevent merging. Hi Andrew, Why create opaque types to avoid something that should be taken from granted (in a said "type-safe" representation)? I
2010 Sep 26
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM Exception Handling
On 26 September 2010 20:13, Nathan Jeffords <blunted2night at gmail.com> wrote: > I believe the perceived problem with using eh.exception is that > is disassociates the source of the value with the invoke instruction that > generated it. As far as reusing the landing pad, that is still possible, it > would just require a phi node in the landing pad to bring all the different >
2010 Aug 25
2
[LLVMdev] Debug information on multiple files
Hi, I'm trying to compile two files together with debug information but seems that LLVM is getting the DW_AT_stmt_list wrong when ld is linking the final executable. Originally, I tried on ARM with Clang (+llc+gas+ln) and, the object files, the DW_AT_stmt_list were null, as expected. When linking, they should point to the offset in the line table, but all of them are still null, so pointing
2011 Mar 14
3
[LLVMdev] Warning in LLVM
When compiling LLVM on my Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P7450 running Ubuntu (gcc 4.4.5), I get this warning: /home/rengolin/workspace/llvm/rw/build/Release+Asserts/lib/libLLVMARMAsmParser.a(ARMAsmParser.o): In function `(anonymous namespace)::ARMAsmParser::ParseRegisterList(llvm::SmallVectorImpl<llvm::MCParsedAsmOperand*>&)': ARMAsmParser.cpp:(.text+0x4a05): warning: memset used with
2011 Jun 17
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM-based address sanity checker
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 17 June 2011 08:55, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > I am rather reluctant to add 'generic' code that handles unknown/untested > > platforms because the memory mapping is very platform specific anyway. > > Indeed, but the point of that is more for helping
2010 Sep 07
2
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
Hello, Erik > Otherwise, I'd like to know what needs to be done to get unions > back in LLVM. Well, the answer is pretty easy: someone should "fix" them to be supported throughout the whole set of libraries and became a "maintainer". Otherwise the feature being unused will quickly became broken. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and