similar to: [LLVMdev] Doubt with GVNPRE

Hello, I am doing a course project of "Adding the strength reduction in existing GVNPRE implementation". But the problem which I am facing is that for many sample programs I tried, the "gvnpre" pass of opt doesn't perform PRE and it leaves the code as it is. This is my sample program and it should do PRE on it but opt is not performing it. Kindly help me out in this part.

It seems the GVNPRE pass has been removed from the main trunk, though it is present in the 2.6 release. From the llvm-commits archive, I found that it was removed  with this checkin: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20090928/088214.html "remove the GVNPRE pass. It has been subsumed by the GVN pass." Does the GVN pass optimize all the partial redundancies

Good evening, Pierre. Here is an example to you. attached. run with -disable-lazy-comilation. It is *as-is* for Win32 but might be applicable to *-linux-elf more smartly. It does get llvm::Function* by function ptr(not name!), and clone a specialized function, and execute specialized one in the same context as parent lli. > - In a running program, can I get pointers to the llvm Module that

Hello ! I wanted to experiment with partial evaluation and llvm seems to be the right tool for this, but since I'm new to it of course I'm a bit lost ! I'll try to explain what I want to do in the simplest possible way : I have a C program. In this program, there is a function f( a,b ). I have a value A for a. I want to specialise f() so I get a function fA( b ) which is the same as

Hi, Yeah I found that it is running LLVM's functions. The functions that are running are: main llvm.dbg.func.start llvm.dbg.stoppoint scanf llvm.dbg.region.end But I dont want all the functions to be called as I am using Dominator Trees and whenever I the statement DominatorTree &DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(F); is encountered by functions other than main, it gives error.

ambika wrote: > Hi, > > Yeah I found that it is running LLVM's functions. The functions that are > running are: > > main > llvm.dbg.func.start > llvm.dbg.stoppoint > scanf > llvm.dbg.region.end > > But I dont want all the functions to be called as I am using Dominator > Trees and whenever I the statement > > DominatorTree &DT =

Hi Daniel, Got it. If that's the case, can I implement it under the guidance of your insights/prototype? I think I can spend more time on implementation. Thanks, Taewook ________________________________ From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 9:41:30 PM To: Taewook Oh Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [NewGVN] Plan for GVNPRE? Of

Hi Daniel, Thank you for your detailed reply, and thank you for working on GVNPRE. I’d more than happy to test/evaluate it with our benchmark once it is ready. Please let me know if you need any help. Thanks, Taewook From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 6:13 PM To: Taewook Oh <twoh at fb.com> Cc: "llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org"

I am studying the Transform/Scalar/LICM.cpp pass, and wrote a simple test program to validate. void testLICM(void){ int i,N=100; int data; for(i=0;i<N;i++){ data = 1; printf("i: %d\n",i); } printf("data: %d\n", data); } I expect the "data=1" will be moved out of loop (either hoist or sink). However, to my surprise, that statement

Hi All, The PRE or GVNPRE is not effective for the below use case. int sum; int phi =30; void f (int i, int *a) { if ((a[i] << (1)) > -15) sum =(phi+ 0x7fffffffL )/ a[i]; if ((a[i] << (2)) > -15) sum =(phi + 0x7fffffffL) /a[i]; } respective asm (clang on trunk ) #clang -O3 -S test.c BB#0: # %entry pushl %edi pushl %esi

Hi, I believe that Module::iterator iterates through all the functions in a program. Am i wrong somewhere? I run this for different files, each having one function each ie main(), but for one it loops twice, and for another it loops thrice. for (Module::iterator I = M.begin(), E = M.end(); I != E; ++I) Can someone explain this behavior. regards, Ambika

I don't think licm looks at loads/stores to allocas -- these are usually handled by mem2reg which happens much earlier (if you run your example with -mem2reg you'll see it already deleted the store). In fact, licm sinks the stores by converting them to stores to allocas first and running mem2reg on that. If you change your example to void testLICM(int* restrict p) { int i,N=100;

On May 24, 2010, at 12:58 PM, ambika wrote: > I run this for different files, each having one function each ie > main(), > but for one it loops twice, and for another it loops thrice. > for (Module::iterator I = M.begin(), E = M.end(); I != E; ++I) It might be iterating over the LLVM intrinsic functions as well as the user-defined functions. Try printing out the function names

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, andreas burman wrote: > I'm planning to apply for SoC and I would like some hints on which projects > the community are most interested in. > > The two projects that I right now think looks most interesting is: > > * Writing an backend for MIPS > and > * New Transformations and Analyses > - Implement GVN-PRE > - Value range propagation

> To me, GVN-PRE and a MIPS backend would be the most useful ones. Do you > have MIPS hardware to test on? If not, a GVNPRE pass might be better, > though you could do the port with a good simulator. Daniel Berlin knows > much about GVNPRE, so he could probably comment more on it. I implemented GVN-PRE for GCC. You could probably do an implementation for LLVM in three months,

It's equivalent to __printf, so prefer __scanf. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> --- include/linux/compiler-gcc.h | 3 ++- include/linux/kernel.h | 8 ++++---- include/xen/xenbus.h | 4 ++-- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 6 ++++++ 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h

It's equivalent to __printf, so prefer __scanf. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> --- include/linux/compiler-gcc.h | 3 ++- include/linux/kernel.h | 8 ++++---- include/xen/xenbus.h | 4 ++-- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 6 ++++++ 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h

Hello, In some of our internal benchmarks, I observe that LLVM performs worse than GCC because LLVM fails to perform PRE when GCC can. I hope this problem goes away when NewGVN equipped with PRE, and wonder if anyone has an idea about the status of PRE on top of NewGVN. Thanks! Best, Taewook -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> Date: Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:36 AM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Updating PHI for Instruction Domination? To: Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com> Since I'm not sure which instructions I might want to replicate, would it be possible to cast the Value from "PHINode::getIncomingValue" to

Hello all, I am rather new to lattice and have a simple question regarding formatting text labels on the axes. I have looked through my own archive on lattice notes, searched and examined 30 or so hits on Dr. Baron's search site, looked through my MASS book, my Data Analysis and Graphics Using R book, R news articles, and I have in my hand the lattice package instructions and have read and