similar to: [LLVMdev] Marking a function prototype as being "persistent"

Hi Christophe, >>> Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try again. Suggestion: what about a comment explaining what "UnitAtATime" means :-) >> >> If UnitAtATime is false this means that you are optimizing functions as you are >> generating them, rather than first generating all functions and other globals >>

Hello and happy new year, I'm using LLVM to JIT-compile the XL programming language. I've recently added a whole-program optimization phase that gives excellent results, but I noticed that the StripDeadPrototypesPass was removing all references to my runtime support functions. Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try again. Suggestion:

Hi Christophe, > I'm using LLVM to JIT-compile the XL programming language. I've recently added a whole-program optimization phase that gives excellent results, but I noticed that the StripDeadPrototypesPass was removing all references to my runtime support functions. why is that a problem? > Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try

Hi Duncan, On 7 janv. 2011, at 01:00, Duncan Sands wrote: > LTO is for doing optimizations that are only valid when the module contains > everything that is needed to build the final executable. So adding a flag to > say "not everything is there after all" makes no sense to me. And indeed, everything is there when I call LTO. The flag is not "not everything is there

Hi, I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and DisableInliner switches. Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in some other ways ? - Sanjiv

On Apr 18, 2011, at 6:46 AM, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > Hi all, > > we're working on compile-time instrumentation for ThreadSanitizer (a > data race detector, see http://code.google.com/p/data-race-test and > http://code.google.com/p/data-race-test/wiki/CompileTimeInstrumentation), > which is implemented as an opt plugin that is ran for each client > C/C++ module we

Hello, I am trying to modify my LLVM-based compiler to perform an initial, no-optimization compilation synchronously on startup and then perform an asynchronous, optimized recompilation in the background, and I am getting in one of the optimization passes. - I am using the official release of LLVM 2.8 - I have compiled LLVM with threading enabled; I am running llvm::llvm_start_multithreaded() on

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Peter Zion <peter.zion at fabric-engine.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to modify my LLVM-based compiler to perform an initial, no-optimization compilation synchronously on startup and then perform an asynchronous, optimized recompilation in the background, and I am getting in one of the optimization passes. > > - I am using the official

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Feb 9, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > > >> Hi, >> I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. >> Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and >> DisableInliner switches. >> >> Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in >> some

Dear LLVMers, I am trying to use your inline pass, and I would like to know if it is possible to remove a function from the bitcode file once it is inlined. Basically, I try: $> opt -inline file2.bc > file2.in.bc and I see that all the functions have been inlined into the main procedure, inside file2.in.bc. However, the inlined function is still in the bitcode, even though it is

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> Agreed. Although I assume you mean invoke the new pass under a >> ThinLTO-only option so that avail extern are not dropped in the >> compile pass before the LTO link? > > > No, this pass

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Gabriel Quadros <gquadrossilva at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > >     I am trying to use your inline pass, and I would like to know if it is > possible to remove a function from the bitcode file once it is inlined. > Basically, I try: > > $> opt -inline file2.bc > file2.in.bc > >     and I see that all the functions

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > Personally, I think the right approach is to add a bool to > createGlobalDCEPass defaulting to true named something like > IsAfterInlining. In most standard pass pipelines, GlobalDCE runs after > inlining for obvious reasons, so the default makes sense. The special case > is

Hi Hal, Thanks for your hint! $ /opt/llvm-svn/bin/opt -S -internalize -internalize-public-api-list=main -globaldce hello3.ll -o hello3.dce.ll    it works :) But I argue that `main` Function should be inserted into ExternalNames by default: Index: lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp 

Hi LLVM developers, $ cat hello.c #include <stdio.h> void foo() { } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {   for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {     printf("%d\n", i);   }   return 0; } $ /opt/llvm-svn/bin/clang --version Fedora clang version 6.0.0 (trunk 316308) (based on LLVM 6.0.0svn) Target: x86_64-redhat-linux Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /opt/llvm-svn/bin $

I've had better luck compiling all of pymol 1.1r2 with -O4 on darwin9. Everythink links and there appears to be no regressions in the resulting code. I take it that LTO in llvm 2.5 is still limited to dead code elimination, correct? Will LTO ever be extended to inlining across files as well as constant-folding and global data allocation optimizations? Or does the reliance on gcc-4.2 as the

Talked to Eric Fri and he suggested that this might be the first of several places where we want behavior of LTO compiles to diverge from normal -O2 compiles. So for now I have implemented this such that we pass down -flto to the -cc1 job, and that gets propagated as a code gen option and into the PassManagerBuilder. I have left the current logic translating -flto to the -emit-llvm-bc option,

Hi Christophe, On 05/09/11 18:35, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > On 5 sept. 2011, at 17:48, Duncan Sands wrote: > >> since the result of a multiply doesn't depend on the signedness, I find it >> strange that your target differentiates between them. What I'm saying is >> that if you have (say) two i32 numbers a and b and you do a signed multiply: >>

On Feb 9, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > Hi, > I need to add switches like -disable-mem2reg, disable-gvn to llvm-ld. > Currently CreateStandardLTOPasses takes in only DisableInternalize and > DisableInliner switches. > > Is modifying this API okay for these new switches, or is it doable in > some other ways ? Why do you want this? -Chris

Erick Tryzelaar <erick.tryzelaar <at> gmail.com> writes: > > I've pretty much finished exposing all I wanted to llvm-c and the > ocaml bindings for the soon to be released 2.7. Does anyone need any > other functions exposed before the code freeze on the 7th? > Hi Erick, Can you make the following functions available in llvm-c. createStandardFunctionPasses