similar to: [LLVMdev] Block management

On Jun 13, 2010, at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Letz wrote: > Hi, > > In my code generator, I need to prepare a block and add instructions to it, then insert this block in a function defined later (that is I cannot create the function at the beginning stage become some info are not available yet). I tried to create a block without any "parent" (BasicBlock::Create(getGlobalContext(),

Hi Chris, >> In my code generator, I need to prepare a block and add instructions to it, then insert this block in a function defined later (that is I cannot create the function at the beginning stage become some info are not available yet). I tried to create a block without any "parent" (BasicBlock::Create(getGlobalContext(), "init"), fill it, but how to link it with

Hello LLVM Developers, I'm trying to replace a function defined in one module into another module (different files). The first issue I ran into was that llvm::Function does not have a method "moveBefore" or "moveAfter" as the llvm::BasicBlock or llvm::Instruction do, so I figured I would just move the BasicBlocks of the replacing function into the function that was being

Hello and thanks for the answer, I'm still facing issues, I'll do my best to explain my situation, as I explained, I have two modules, each one with its own main and functions, I would like to replace in the *oldModule* a function call that is calling *foo2* (defined in *oldModule*) to instead call *foo3*, which is defined in the *refModule. *So in summary, I have: 1. The original

Hi ! I'm trying to modify the code in a machine function pass… I added a new basicblock and I want to add a jump to an another BB from my new BB. Here is my code : bool Obfuscation::runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &MF) { MachineBasicBlock *newEntry = MF.CreateMachineBasicBlock(); MF.insert(MF.begin(), newEntry); std::vector<MachineBasicBlock*> origBB;

Hi Ahmad, What does that tool does besides what LLVM linker already does? I don't think my problem is in linking both modules, I think LLVM linker does the job for me, the issue is when changing the called function to call another function (in the example previously provided, to change it from foo2 to foo3, and adjusting the function parameter's references). Regards, Daniel Moya El

I need to implement a conditional in my RJS template which looks something like: if (page.select(''row1'').first != null) page << "new TableRow.MoveAfter(''row1'', ''newrow'');" else page << "new TableRow.MoveAfter(''row2'', ''newrow'');" end Now, dumb question.. My

Hi, I want to use a function defined in c(++)-code from code generated by llvm. For this I use ExecutionEngine.addGlobalMapping(). I started with the JIT execution engine and everything worked, then I switched to the interpreter engine and it stopped working, but only if compiled on a Linux system. More precisely it works if I use llvm 3.8.1 + gcc (Linux) + JIT llvm 3.8.0 + mingw-gcc

Thank you Ahmad, I figured out that, although the type of both p(oInst) and p(nInst) were the same, I had to: for (unsigned int i = 0; i < callOInst->getNumArgOperands(); i++) { callOInst->getArgOperand(i)->mutateType(callNInst->getArgOperand(i)->getType()); } that solves the issue at the calling instruction in the main function, but now I see that *linkModules* does not work

> > <32 x float> takes up 8 SSE registers; you're likely running into > issues with register pressure. Does it work better if you use > something smaller like <4 x float>? > > Besides that, I don't see any obvious issues. > > -Eli You are right yes. The code works faster with <4 x float> types, with still works a bit slower than the scalar

Hi, Our DSL emit sub-optimal LLVM IR that we optimize later on (LLVM IR ==> LLVM IR) before dynamically compiling it with the JIT. We would like to simply follow what clang/clang++ does when compiling with -O1/-O2/-O3 options. Our strategy up to now what to look at the opt.cpp code and take part of it in order to implement our optimization code. It appears to be rather difficult to follow

Le 2 juin 2010 à 12:21, Eli Friedman a écrit : > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at free.fr> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> We need to generate "Floating point constants" in our code. In http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html it is explained that FP has to follow special encoding rules to be handled by LLVM later one (hexadecimal coding...) >>

Hi, We are experimenting directly generating vectorized LLVM IR (using <8 x float> kind of types), then compiling the code to SSE on a 64 bits machine. Right now the equivalent code in scalar mode sill outperform the SSE one. What is the quality of the SSE support in X86 LLVL backend? Are they any specific things to be aware of to improve the speed? Thanks Stéphane Letz

Le 5 juil. 2013 à 04:11, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> a écrit : > On 07/04/2013 01:39 PM, Stéphane Letz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Our DSL can generate C or directly generate LLVM IR. With LLVM 3.3, we can vectorize the C produced code using clang with -O3, or clang with -O1 then opt -O3 -vectorize-loops. But the same program generating LLVM IR version cannot be

Hi, I'm having trouble using virtual register in the X86 backend. I implemented a new intrinsic and I use a custom inserter. The goal of the intrinsic is to set the content of the stack to zero at the end of each function. Here is my code: MachineBasicBlock * X86TargetLowering::EmitBURNSTACKWithCustomInserter( MachineInstr *MI, MachineBasicBlock

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at grame.fr> wrote: >> >> <32 x float> takes up 8 SSE registers; you're likely running into >> issues with register pressure.  Does it work better if you use >> something smaller like <4 x float>? >> >> Besides that, I don't see any obvious issues. >> >> -Eli > >

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at grame.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > Our DSL emit sub-optimal LLVM IR that we optimize later on (LLVM IR ==> LLVM IR) before dynamically compiling it with the JIT. We would like to simply follow what clang/clang++ does when compiling with -O1/-O2/-O3 options. Our strategy up to now what to look at the opt.cpp code and take part of it

Le 5 juil. 2013 à 17:23, Arnold Schwaighofer <aschwaighofer at apple.com> a écrit : > > On Jul 5, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at grame.fr> wrote: > >> >> Le 5 juil. 2013 à 04:11, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> a écrit : >> >>> On 07/04/2013 01:39 PM, Stéphane Letz wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>>

Hi, We need to generate "Floating point constants" in our code. In http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html it is explained that FP has to follow special encoding rules to be handled by LLVM later one (hexadecimal coding...) Is there any code available in LLVM to handle this kind of "standard float to LLVM float" conversion? Thanks. Stéphane Letz

Le 3 juin 2010 à 16:00, Martin Guy a écrit : > [off list] > >> 0.8f get converted in 0x3FE99999A0000000 by LLVM > > single precision > >> http://babbage.cs.qc.edu/IEEE-754/Decimal.html gives: >> >> 0x3FE999999999999A instead and this value cannot be read back by "llc"... > > double precision > > M Well For float 0.8 :