similar to: [LLVMdev] dump cfg after each pass

Hi David, > A dumb question -- is there a way to dump cfg after each pass, something like: > --print-cfg-after=sccp, or is there a standard post-processing script that > builds the cfg vcg/dot file from the ir dump? if your IR is dumped to ir.ll, you can do this to see the cfg: opt -disable-output -view-cfg ir.ll You may want to use -view-cfg-only rather than -view-cfg if you are not

On 10/27/2010 01:59 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > A dumb question -- is there a way to dump cfg after each pass, something > like: --print-cfg-after=sccp, or is there a standard post-processing script > that builds the cfg vcg/dot file from the ir dump? You can use to create a dot file of everyfunction for an normal llvm-ir.ll file. opt -dot-cfg llvm-ir.ll If you store the dump in a

This is mostly for Richard, but others may have useful thoughts too. I just took a look at the debian stuff. It's generally looking good (though I haven't actually tried to build the debs). A few comments on items in TODO: > xapian-doc: in index.html, there is one broken link (which occurs in > two places, pointing to the full source documentation, since we don't >

On Oct 8, 2010, at 1:05 PM, John Criswell wrote: > On 10/8/10 1:29 PM, Owen Anderson wrote: >> Hello fellow LLVM-ers, >> >> As those of you who follow llvm-commits have probably noticed, I've been hard at work reworking our pass infrastructure to perform pass initialization/registration without static constructors. This is a boon for clients of the LLVM libraries, as

Chris Lattner schrieb: > On Aug 21, 2009, at 3:04 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: >>> This isn't really possible. The issue is that MemDep doesn't just >>> "analyze your function". It is designed to be as lazy as possible, >>> which means that it only does analysis when a query is performed. This >>> means that if you have

Chris Lattner schrieb: > > On Aug 20, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass >> requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary analyses. >> This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. >> >> The problem is, that I would like

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Marc Brünink<marc at bruenink.de> wrote: >>> actually my problem is easier. So I still have hope that it is possible: >>> >>> MemDep->Pass1->Pass2 >>> >>> Pass1 uses MemDep. Pass2 only uses Pass1. Eventually, Pass2 changes the >>> code. Unfortunately, non-local dependencies of MemDep might point to

On Aug 21, 2009, at 3:04 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: >> This isn't really possible. The issue is that MemDep doesn't just >> "analyze your function". It is designed to be as lazy as possible, >> which means that it only does analysis when a query is performed. >> This >> means that if you have MemDep->Pass1->Pass2 and Pass2 uses MemDep

Hi, I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary analyses. This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. The problem is, that I would like MemoryDependenceAnalysis to run on the unaltered module. I do not want to have dependencies to changed code. What is the cleanest way to do this? Sounds

On Aug 20, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: > Hi, > > I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass > requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary > analyses. > This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. > > The problem is, that I would like MemoryDependenceAnalysis to run on > the > unaltered

Dear Devang Patel, In response to your comment on bug 1868, how do I get BottomPass to requires Pass2 before Pass1? Is it by reversing the order of the calls to AU.addRequired()? -- John T. -- John T. Criswell jcriswel at bigw.org "It's today!" said Piglet. "My favorite day," said Pooh.

Thanks, John. This sounds reasonable that the analysis group just provides an interface to its implementors (pass). Then I have another question, is it allowed to specify multiple pass in the same analysis group in the command line for opt? If yes, which pass will be used for the call of getAnaysis<AnalysisGroup>()? -Thomson On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:34 PM, John Criswell <criswell at

Hi, > I tried it with -o - but its producing an error > > gcc: fatal error: cannot specify -o with -c, -S or -E with multiple files > > What you suggest? what I wrote: >> for F in *.c ; do B=`basename $F .c` ; gcc -fplugin=/path/to/dragonegg.so >> -S -o - $F -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-emit-ir | opt -adce -o $B.ll ; done >> clang *.ll Thanks to the for loop and

Hi, > If I compile the program using the following command line i.e. > > $ clang -O3 -lm *.c this may be doing link time optimization. > > then > > $ time ./a.out > > real 0m2.606s > user 0m2.584s > sys 0m0.012s > > BUT, if I use all the optimizations enabled with -O3 but specify them > explicity i.e. you can just use "opt -O3"

On 6/25/12 8:55 PM, Thomson wrote: > Thanks, John. > > This sounds reasonable that the analysis group just provides an > interface to its implementors (pass). Then I have another question, is > it allowed to specify multiple pass in the same analysis group in the > command line for opt? Yes, you can do that. Using multiple analysis passes that belong to the same group may

Hello I need some help here please. If we compile source files directly in to native code: $ clang -O3 -lm *.c then the runtime is like following real 0m2.807s user 0m2.784s sys 0m0.012s and If we emit LLVM bytcode and apply optimizations $ clang -O3 -c -emit-llvm *.c $ llvm-link *.o -o comb.ll $ time lli ./comb.ll then the runtime is real 0m2.671s user 0m2.640s sys 0m0.020s But, if I

Hello, I have no idea how to implement the following scenario apart from running two instances of samba on the same machine... I need a setup where two different Windows users will authen- ticate with two different passwords but get mapped to the same unix user. That is JOE got password PASS1 and maps to unix user joe with uid 1000 and JACK got password PASS2 and maps to unix user joe with

Hi Yes, they both are exactly the same. Regards Shahzad On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi, is the comb.ll used here: > > >> $ time lli ./comb.ll >> >> then the runtime is >> >> real    0m2.671s >> user    0m2.640s >> sys     0m0.020s >> >> But, if I convert this same file comb,ll

Hello all, I have written one pass to collect information about specific calls in an llvm IR file and am not trying to reference the results from the first pass in a second pass. What is the correct way to reference an additional custom pass in LLVM? At the moment the project is set up under the lib/Transforms directory in source and has the current layout: Thresholds/ include/

Hello, I'm trying to conect two 1.6.2.13 Asterisk server with IAX. This is my configuration: Asterisk A: iax.conf register => coiax:pass1 at 69.164.207.166 [smiax] type=friend host=dynamic trunk=yes secret=pass2 context=phones deny=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 permit=69.164.207.166/255.255.255.255 qualify=yes Console: iax2 registry 69.164.207.166:4569 N coiax 69.164.197.105:4569