similar to: [LLVMdev] Extensible Metadata in LLVM IR

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 30000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Extensible Metadata in LLVM IR"

2009 Sep 16
1
[LLVMdev] [proposal] Extensible IR metadata
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt > > Here is partial initial implementation. > Thoughts ? setHasMetadata
2009 Sep 11
0
[LLVMdev] [proposal] Extensible IR metadata
I've got a suggestion for a refinement: Right now, we have classes like DILocation that wrap an MDNode* to provide more convenient access to it. It would be more convenient for users if instead of MDNode *DbgInfo = Inst->getMD(MDKind::DbgTag); Inst2->setMD(MDKind::DbgTag, DbgInfo); they could write: DILocation DbgInfo = Inst->getMD<DILocation>();
2011 Dec 21
0
[LLVMdev] creating new Metadata
> Dear llvm-ers, > I am trying to attach a customized metadata to llvm instructions. > Let's say, I want to attach some number to each instruction. > I am trying to use > > void Instruction::setMetadata(unsigned KindID, MDNode* Node) > > but I am not sure how to create a brand new instance of an MDNode. > Do you have any code samples demonstrating how to do that?
2011 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] creating new Metadata
On 12/21/11 11:24 PM, Oksana Tkachuk wrote: > Hello, > Thank you very much for the pointers. > I am are able to create new MDNodes, filled with some constants, and > attach them > to llvm instructions. However, the metadata map is not getting updated > as expected. > For example, instead of the expected new entry If you look at PoolMDPass::runOnModule(), you'll see that
2011 Dec 22
3
[LLVMdev] creating new Metadata
Hello, Thank you very much for the pointers. I am are able to create new MDNodes, filled with some constants, and attach them to llvm instructions. However, the metadata map is not getting updated as expected. For example, instead of the expected new entry !n = metadata !{some values} we are getting !n = metadata !{null} Do you know what might be wrong? Do we need to enter the MDNodes into the
2009 Sep 16
0
[LLVMdev] [proposal] Extensible IR metadata
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt Here is partial initial implementation. Thoughts ? - Devang -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mdn.diff Type: application/octet-stream
2010 Apr 14
1
[LLVMdev] Extensible Metadata in LLVM IR
Devang and I wrote up a description of this new LLVM 2.7 feature here: http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/extensible-metadata-in-llvm-ir.html Thoughts and comments are welcome, -Chris
2010 Oct 06
0
[LLVMdev] Associating types directly with debug metadata?
>>> Here is another version of the patch. This one includes also a small patch to llvm-gcc so that it generates the type metadata for structures and classes. This one also generates and parses correctly the metadata for .ll files. No .bc support yet. The biggest problem with this version is that it breaks when the compiler/linker performs type reductions, and I don't understand
2009 Jul 28
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL : Introduce NamedMetadata
Devang Patel wrote: > In LLVM IR metadata is used to attach auxiliary information with > various IR constructs. Currently metadata information is represented > using MDNode and MDString. The metadata can refer to LLVM values but > these references are not counted as regular "uses" of these values > because metadata is maintained 'on the side'. This ensures that the
2009 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL : Introduce NamedMetadata
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Dan Gohman<gohman at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > > >> In LLVM IR metadata is used to attach auxiliary information with >> various IR constructs. Currently metadata information is represented >> using MDNode and MDString. The metadata can refer to LLVM values but >> these
2009 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL : Introduce NamedMetadata
On Jul 27, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > In LLVM IR metadata is used to attach auxiliary information with > various IR constructs. Currently metadata information is represented > using MDNode and MDString. The metadata can refer to LLVM values but > these references are not counted as regular "uses" of these values > because metadata is maintained 'on the
2011 Nov 20
0
[LLVMdev] How can I output assembly comments from emitPrologue()?
So, an update. I have managed to generate comments, although it does create a non-existent instruction. My method is as follows (and I would appreciate any comments on how to do it "better", although note that this won't make it into the final code :).) 1. I declared a "fake" instruction type to hold comments, ala: class FakeInst<dag outs, dag ins, string asmstr,
2010 Oct 06
1
[LLVMdev] Associating types directly with debug metadata?
Pekka Nikander wrote: >>>> Here is another version of the patch. This one includes also a small patch to llvm-gcc so that it generates the type metadata for structures and classes. This one also generates and parses correctly the metadata for .ll files. No .bc support yet. The biggest problem with this version is that it breaks when the compiler/linker performs type reductions, and
2009 Jul 27
4
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL : Introduce NamedMetadata
In LLVM IR metadata is used to attach auxiliary information with various IR constructs. Currently metadata information is represented using MDNode and MDString. The metadata can refer to LLVM values but these references are not counted as regular "uses" of these values because metadata is maintained 'on the side'. This ensures that the optimizer is not influenced by auxiliary
2011 Nov 20
2
[LLVMdev] How can I output assembly comments from emitPrologue()?
Dear all, I am looking to output assembly comments in my emitPrologue() function, just for my own readability. Searching for a way to do this found me this thread - http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-October/043722.html, which says that the best way to output comments from somewhere like emitPrologue() is to: 1. Create an MDString for the comment. 2. Attach it to an LLVM
2009 Sep 11
12
[LLVMdev] [proposal] Extensible IR metadata
Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt -Chris
2009 Nov 22
1
[LLVMdev] embedded metadata
I have a quick question about embedded metadata. I've lost track of exactly what we want to support. What about making MDNodes that refer to Instructions? Is that desired any more, or is that obsolete? I had a patch to do this locally and I either want to fix it up and commit it or discard it. The relevant section of my locally modified test/Feature/embeddedmetadata.ll reads: define
2009 Sep 11
4
[LLVMdev] [proposal] Extensible IR metadata
On Friday 11 September 2009 15:20, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > I've got a suggestion for a refinement: > > Right now, we have classes like DILocation that wrap an MDNode* to > provide more convenient access to it. It would be more convenient for > users if instead of > > MDNode *DbgInfo = Inst->getMD(MDKind::DbgTag); > Inst2->setMD(MDKind::DbgTag, DbgInfo); >
2012 Jan 30
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Module Flags Metadata
On Jan 30, 2012, at 11:34 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: > Even if we single out TBAA, recall that TBAA was one of the main > motivations for the design of MDNodes -- it's in the second sentance, > and most of the last paragraph, of > http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/extensible-metadata-in-llvm-ir.html ... and in last paragraph the author says ... "This use of metadata is also safe,
2012 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Module Flags Metadata
On Jan 27, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > [ removing cfe-dev from the cc list ] > > On Jan 27, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> On Jan 27, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Devang Patel wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: >>> >>>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Devang