similar to: [LLVMdev] What instruction selection algorithm is used in LLVM?

Hello, for one course at our Brno University of Technology, I made a presentation about languages used in LLVM during compilation. I think also other may find it useful, so I am sending it here, so you can add it somewhere on the web if you will would like to. It is not exactly a publication, rather lecture slides. Title: Languages Used in LLVM During Compilation Date: 30th April 2014

Hi everyone, I am trying to write a pass, that finds some instructions and replaces them with my intrinsics, but I am having problem understanding, how this should be done. Let's say I have this instruction: %tmp14 = load i32* getelementptr ([32 x i32]* @gpregs, i32 0, i64 28) and i need to read the load's operands and replace it by let's say: %tmp14 = call i32

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:32 AM, ihusar<ihusar at fit.vutbr.cz> wrote: >                //now i need to create an instruction that represents a call to a intrinsic >                Function* FIntr = Intrinsic::getDeclaration(&M, Intrinsic::regread_i32); > >                // here it fails: void llvm::CallInst::init(llvm::Value*): >                //Assertion

Hello gyus, I am working on a project, where we are trying to create a development environment for new ASIP processor design. Part of this project is a compiler generator, where we would like to generate C compiler from some instruction description. To keep it short, let's say, that in each instruction's semantics is described by some C code. What I would like to do is to compile this

On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:55:04 +0200, Pertti Kellomäki <pertti.kellomaki at tut.fi> wrote: > Hi Adam, > > John is right, the TCE stuff would be useful for you. Our > compiler targets a processor template that the designer can > populate pretty freely. The compiler then reads the architecture > description and creates an LLVM backend on the fly. > > Please don't

On Jan 7, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Venkatraman Govindaraju wrote: > When I run LLC with option "-O0 -march=sparc" on following testcase, > fast register allocator crashes with "UNREACHABLE executed" error. LLC > generates code successfully with other standard register allocators > available. I haven't investigated the Sparc backend specifically but... My guess is

The current llvm/llvm-gcc4.2 svn is now fixed with respect to the extra warnings that were being emitted by the gfortran compiler. The gfortran testsuite results under Intel Darwin9 are appended below. Jack Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9 === gfortran tests === Running target unix/-m32 FAIL: gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error) FAIL:

Building llvm 2.3 and llvm-gcc4.2-2.3 on Mac OS X 10.5, I am seeing the following failures remaining in the gcc 4.2.1 gfortran testsuite... LAST_UPDATED: Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9 === gfortran tests === Running target unix FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL:

Building the prerelease of llvm-gcc 2.4 on Intel darwin9 with the following patch... --- llvm-gcc-4.2-2.3.999-20081024.source/gcc/stub-c.c.org 2008-10-30 18:55:45.000000000 -0400 +++ llvm-gcc-4.2-2.3.999-20081024.source/gcc/stub-c.c 2008-10-30 18:57:29.000000000 -0400 @@ -157,3 +157,27 @@ { gcc_assert(0); } + + +bool cvt_utf8_utf16 (const unsigned char *, size_t, unsigned char **, +

Using the proposed patch for enabling the i386 multilib under the x86_64-apple-darwin build... http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-August/025040.html the following gfortran testsuite results are obtained... Native configuration is x86_64-apple-darwin10 === gfortran tests === Running target unix/-m32 FAIL: gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error) FAIL:

I've recently been looking at how to implement in LLVM IR the rounding of floating point values when casting using different rounding modes and I've hit some problems. It seems that when casting down floats to less precise types the ``fptrunc`` LLVM IR instruction is used. The LLVM language reference suggests that it just truncates the value (which would be equivalent to rounding towards

-disable-O0-optnone has no effect with anything other than -O0. -O0 being passed to clang also causes all functions to be marked noinline. I don't know if there is a command line option to turn that off. I recommend passing "-O1 -Xclang -disable-llvm-passes" to clang. Passing -O0 very specifically means disable optimizations. ~Craig On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 12:25 PM, toddy wang

Why are you using build directions from "flang" which is a fortran compiler and maintained by different people than the LLVM/clang community? But then compiling C/C++ code? Their bug database should be used for filing bugs against the fortran compiler not a C/C++ compiler issue. ~Craig On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 1:04 PM, toddy wang <wenwangtoddy at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks a

This is probably a trivial question but the way I used to do this turns out to be flawed. I used run clang with -O0 -emit-llvm and then use the resulting IR with opt -O3. The problem is that clang at -O0 does not generate TBAA metadata so the passes run by opt behave differently. What’s the recommended way of doing this? Thanks, Adam

Adam, I just fixed this issue a few days ago. A version from the trunk should work for you. Cheers, Nadav -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of ihusar Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 15:52 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] How to use ConstantFoldConstantExpression? I forgot to mention, that I use

Thanks a lot, it is clear to me now. BTW, for Clang's slowdown, I submit an issue here: https://github.com/flang-compiler/flang/issues/356 I have no idea about the root cause. Maybe due to debug symbols. But, I already use -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release. Anyway, I believe there is a bug somewhere. On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: >

@Craig and @Michael After installing clang-5.0 (download from http://releases.llvm.org, does not have Flang build's slowdown mention above), 1. clang++ -O0 -Xclang -disable-O0-optnone -Xclang -disable-llvm-passes -c -emit-llvm -o a.bc LULESH.cc; opt -O3 a.bc -o b.bc; llc -O3 -filetype=obj b.bc -o b.o ; clang++ b.o -o b.out; ./b.out 20 runtime: 2.354069e+01 2. clang++ -O1 -Xclang

After build LLVM5.0, I found that clang-5.0 is extremely slow. Even it is built with -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release For building LULESH.cc, it gets stucked at linkage stage. I build it as instructed from here https://github.com/flang-compiler/flang Maybe I should submit a bug. On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:41 PM, toddy wang <wenwangtoddy at gmail.com> wrote: > Craig, thanks a lot! > >

@Zhaopei, thanks for the clarification. @Craig and @Michael, for clang 4.0.1, -Xclang -disable-O0-optnone gives the following error message. From which version -disable-O0-optnone gets supported? [twang15 at c89 temp]$ clang++ -O0 -Xclang -disable-O0-optnone -Xclang -disable-llvm-passes -c -emit-llvm -o a.bc LULESH.cc error: unknown argument: '-disable-O0-optnone' [twang15 at c89

@Sean, do you mean llc ? For llc 4.0 and llc 5.0, I cannot find -lto-newpm-passes option, is it a hidden one? On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 7:37 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 5, 2018 11:30 PM, "toddy wang via llvm-dev" < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > What I am trying is to compile a program with different sets of >