Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] AliasAnalysis Documentation Ambiguity"
2013 May 27
0
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Regarding the name, I'm not sure noaliasAtFunctionEntry makes sense, for two reasons:
a) The pointer involved may not be defined at entry.
b) We already have something which is similar in spirit - IsIdentifiedObject. That covers the 3 cases I have in the new function, but also two additional ones: GlobalValues which are not GlobalAliases, and byval arguments.
Unfortunately, a check of
2013 May 27
1
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Kuperstein, Michael M wrote:
> Regarding the name, I'm not sure noaliasAtFunctionEntry makes sense, for two reasons:
> a) The pointer involved may not be defined at entry.
Right, I thought of that too.
> b) We already have something which is similar in spirit - IsIdentifiedObject. That covers the 3 cases I have in the new function, but also two additional ones: GlobalValues which
2010 Jun 11
0
[LLVMdev] AliasAnalysis Documentation Ambiguity
What do you think of this patch? I have added a check for the case I mentioned in the previous email as well as a similar situation I discovered later.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Gohman" <gohman at apple.com>
To: "Thomas B. Jablin" <tjablin at CS.Princeton.EDU>
Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent:
2013 May 27
0
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Thanks Nick!
Can you just check sanity before I commit?
(Or suggest a better name for the function...)
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Lewycky [mailto:nicholas at mxc.ca]
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2013 09:54
To: Kuperstein, Michael M
Cc: LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Kuperstein, Michael M wrote:
> Ping?
Pong! Sorry for the slow review,
2013 May 26
2
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Kuperstein, Michael M wrote:
> Ping?
Pong! Sorry for the slow review, I had this patch starred but hadn't got
around to it. Yes, the rationale and implementation are correct.
> (Is there a code owner for AA, btw?)
(It falls back on the more general code owner who is Chris Lattner in
this case, "Everything not covered by someone else".)
+/// isNoAliasArgument - Return true
2013 May 27
2
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Kuperstein, Michael M wrote:
> Thanks Nick!
>
> Can you just check sanity before I commit?
> (Or suggest a better name for the function...)
Sure!
+static bool canNotAliasDiffArgument(const Value *V)
+{
+ return (isa<AllocaInst>(V) || isNoAliasCall(V) || isNoAliasArgument(V));
+}
Extra parens?
The name "canNotAliasDiffArgument" works, but it's named for what we
2010 May 11
1
[LLVMdev] All CallInsts mayHaveSideEffects
Does any real code benefit from dead code eliminating read-only functions?
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Reid Kleckner" <rnk at mit.edu>
To: "Thomas B. Jablin" <tjablin at CS.Princeton.EDU>
Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 9:38:47 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]
2009 Mar 09
2
[LLVMdev] hash_set and hash_map?
Hi,
I saw that Nick Lewycky removed the LLVM portable hash_map and hash_sets. My research group was relying on those classes. What replaces hash_map and hash_set? The LLVM implementation was very convenient as there is no equivalent in STL, and Microsoft's implementation had a different name, as does the C++ 0X implementation. Thanks.
Tom Jablin
2008 Sep 12
1
[LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli
Hi,
Is this the right mailing list for sending in diffs by irregular contributers? Should I send diffs directly to the code owner instead?
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas B. Jablin" <tjablin at CS.Princeton.EDU>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:55:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
2008 Sep 25
2
[LLVMdev] CallTargets Analysis Incorrect
Hi,
The call target pass in the poolalloc suite yields an incorrect output for the following short test program:
#include <stdio.h>
struct OP {
void (*func)(struct OP*);
};
void bar(struct OP *op);
void foo(struct OP *op) {
printf("Foo\n");
op->func = bar;
}
void bar(struct OP *op) {
printf("Bar\n");
op->func = foo;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
2010 Jun 17
0
[LLVMdev] Loopinfo Analysis
Hi Hisham,
Most likely the basic blocks are the headers of two different loops. Try running viewCFG() on the function in question to see if this is the case.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hisham Chowdhury" <hisham_chow at yahoo.com>
To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 7:22:00 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [LLVMdev] Loopinfo Analysis
2013 May 26
0
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Ping?
(Is there a code owner for AA, btw?)
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Kuperstein, Michael M
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 18:23
To: LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Cc: Raoux, Thomas F
Subject: [LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand the semantics of noalias arguments, and I'm not entirely sure I
2013 May 21
2
[LLVMdev] Mixing noalias and regular arguments
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand the semantics of noalias arguments, and I'm not entirely sure I got it correctly.
To the best of my understanding, if an argument is declared noalias, "This indicates that pointer values based on the argument do not alias pointer values which are not based on it" implies, among other things, that it cannot alias any other argument, even if that
2010 Jun 16
2
[LLVMdev] Loopinfo Analysis
Hello,
I have a question regrading the analysis pass that generates loop info from an .ll code. My previous understanding was there will be just one loop header(in the loop info) for a particular loop. But, when i use isLoopHeader() member function from the loop info class I get 'true' return value for two different basic blocks. Note both basic blocks are loop conditional block(break
2008 Dec 08
1
[LLVMdev] MachineCodeEmitter Patch
Thanks. I do not have commit privilege.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Evan Cheng" <evan.cheng at apple.com>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 8, 2008 5:39:33 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] MachineCodeEmitter Patch
Looks good. Do you have commit privilege?
Evan
On Nov 22, 2008, at
2008 Sep 30
0
[LLVMdev] CallTargets Analysis Incorrect
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Thomas B. Jablin
<tjablin at cs.princeton.edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> The call target pass in the poolalloc suite yields an incorrect output for the following short test program:
The DSA results are now (r56847) correct for this test case. The call
is marked incomplete. Doing better is actually a pathological case in
DSA which is hard to fix without
2008 Sep 16
3
[LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli
----- "Evan Cheng" <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2008, at 8:44 AM, Thomas B. Jablin wrote:
>
> > Evan,
> > So, if I understand you correctly, the design you have in mind is
> > to: create a PassManager, pass it to the JIT on construction, and
> > modify runJITOnFunction to run the second PassManager on the
> > Function
2010 May 11
1
[LLVMdev] All CallInsts mayHaveSideEffects
Hi,
All CallInsts should return true for Instruction::mayHaveSideEffects() because functions are not guaranteed to halt.
Inliner::runOnSCC calls isInstructionTriviallyDead to determine whether code can be dead code eliminated. isInstructionTriviallyDead returns true if Instruction::mayHaveSideEffects() returns false. A function that potentially runs forever based on its input but does not write
2012 Feb 15
2
[LLVMdev] Wrong AliasAnalysis::getModRefInfo result
Just want to test out the LLVM's AliasAnalysis::getModRefInfo API. The
input C code is very simple:
void foo(int *a, int *b)
{
for(int i=0; i<10; i++)
b[i] = a[i]*a[i];
}
int main()
{
int a[10];
int b[10];
for(int i=0; i<10; i++)
a[i] = i;
foo(a,b);
return 0;
}
Obviously, for "foo", it only reads from array "a" and only writes to array
2012 Feb 16
0
[LLVMdev] Wrong AliasAnalysis::getModRefInfo result
Something must be wrong, more probable on my side. So the C source code is
unchanged, I just did another experiment to first extract all the GEPs in
the code, and call AliasAnalysis::alias on each pair of GEPs. Here is the
code:
AliasAnalysis &AA = getAnalysis<AliasAnalysis>();
TargetData &TD = getAnalysis<TargetData>();
for (Module::iterator it = M.begin();