similar to: [LLVMdev] Version Compatibility

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 60000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Version Compatibility"

2011 May 03
1
[LLVMdev] Version Compatibility
Is it safe to run the llvm-tools from mainline on bitcode from llvm-2.7? Thanks, Arushi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110503/e06836f5/attachment.html>
2011 May 04
1
[LLVMdev] Loop-Unroll optimization
1. You should run the passes in the same opt command, for passes like loops which is an analysis pass provides results to the following passes. 2. You can pass a -debug flag to opt to see the some debugging info. 3. I tried this opt -mem2reg -loops -loopsimplify -loop-unroll -unroll-count=3 -debug loop.o -o tt.bc and got this message. Loop Size = 14 Can't unroll; loop not terminated by
2011 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] GVN Infinite loop
Mainline. ------------------------------ From: John Criswell Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:34 PM To: Arushi Aggarwal Cc: LLVM Dev Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] GVN Infinite loop On 5/3/11 5:25 PM, Arushi Aggarwal wrote: Hi, GVN seems to be running in an infinite loop on my example. I have attached the output of one iteration. I cant seem to reduce the testcase either. Are you running with LLVM
2011 May 03
0
[LLVMdev] Loop-Unroll optimization
Even after all the sequence of commands below bit-code is not showing any effect of loop-unrolling *manish at manish:~/Test2$ llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loops Hello.bc -o Hello1.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -loopsimplify Hello1.bc -o Hello2.bc* *manish at manish:~/Test2$ opt-2.8 -indvars Hello2.bc -o Hello3.bc* *manish at
2011 Feb 23
0
[LLVMdev] LLVMdev Digest, Vol 80, Issue 37-Help to unsubscribe
Please unsubscribe me from this list. Sujatha Gurumurthy Staffing Consultant/Talent Advisor UMG - Ultra Mobile Group sujatha.gurumurthy at intel.com US ERP Manager Interested in Employee Referral Program Visit referral.intel.com/ Intel USA Employee Referral Program Group 100 Best Companies to Work For 2011: Intel - INTC - from FORTUNE -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at
2011 Apr 05
3
[LLVMdev] GEP vs IntToPtr/PtrToInt
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Hi, >> Is it correct to convert, >>   %196 = load i32* %195, align 8                  ; <i32> [#uses=1] >>   %197 = zext i32 %196 to i64                     ; <i64> [#uses=1] >>   %198 = ptrtoint i8* %193 to i64                 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
2011 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] GEP vs IntToPtr/PtrToInt
This code is generated for va_arg. %6 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.__va_list_tag* %5, i32 0, i32 3 ; <i8**> [#uses=1] %7 = load i8** %6, align 8 ; <i8*> [#uses=1] %8 = getelementptr inbounds [1 x %struct.__va_list_tag]* %ap, i64 0, i64 0 ; <%struct.__va_list_tag*> [#uses=1] %9 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.__va_list_tag* %8, i32 0, i32 0 ;
2011 Aug 17
2
[LLVMdev] Is va_arg deprecated?
FWIW, attached is a similar patch that adds a -falways-use-llvm-vaarg flag to Clang. Applies against mainline. (As discussed, va_arg isn't really supported well so this probably doesn't work well on anything other than simple code, YMMV, etc) ~Will On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > Have these changes made it to mainline? Is
2011 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] Is va_arg deprecated?
On Aug 17, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Will Dietz wrote: > FWIW, attached is a similar patch that adds a -falways-use-llvm-vaarg > flag to Clang. > > Applies against mainline. > > (As discussed, va_arg isn't really supported well so this probably > doesn't work well on anything other than simple code, YMMV, etc) > > ~Will > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:29 PM,
2011 Apr 04
2
[LLVMdev] GEP vs IntToPtr/PtrToInt
On 4/4/2011 6:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal<arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Is it correct to convert, >>> %196 = load i32* %195, align 8 ;<i32> [#uses=1] >>> %197 = zext i32 %196 to i64 ;<i64> [#uses=1] >>> %198 =
2010 Dec 13
1
[LLVMdev] How can I determine safely if a CallSite is "live" in a DSGraphs context
Hi, I believe shouldHaveNodeForValue() should return false for ConstantPointerNullValue. Fixed in r121707. Arushi On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Kevin Streit <kevin.streit at googlemail.com>wrote: > I'm using BUDataStructures... But I tried LocalDatastructures and it didn't > work either... > On Dec 13, 2010 6:52 PM, "Arushi Aggarwal" <arushi987 at
2011 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] GEP vs IntToPtr/PtrToInt
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:10 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 4/4/2011 6:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal<arushi987 at gmail.com> >>  wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> Is it correct to convert, >>>>   %196 = load i32* %195, align 8                
2011 Apr 06
0
[LLVMdev] Incompatible types at call site
Unoptimized IR %tmp63 = call %struct.TypHeader* (...)* bitcast (%struct.TypHeader* (%struct.TypHeader*, i64, i64)* @Cyclotomic to %struct.TypHeader* (...)*)(%struct.TypHeader* %tmp62, i64 %tmp24, i32 1) nounwind, !dbg !907 ; <%struct.TypHeader*> [#uses=1] Optimized IR %tmp63 = call%struct.TypHeader* (%struct.TypHeader*, i64, i64)* @Cyclotomic (%struct.TypHeader* %tmp62, i64 %tmp24,
2011 Aug 17
2
[LLVMdev] Is va_arg deprecated?
To get clang to emit va_arg instructions for va_arg() calls, as opposed to manually lowering it in the frontend, same as the llvm-gcc patch sent earlier does. ~Will On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com> wrote: > > On Aug 17, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Will Dietz wrote: > >> FWIW, attached is a similar patch that adds a -falways-use-llvm-vaarg
2011 May 16
0
[LLVMdev] Upgrading to llvm-2.9
namespace llvm { class PassRegistry; void initializeFooPass(PassRegistry&); } using namespace llvm; namespace { class Foo : public ModulePass { public: static char ID; Foo() : ModulePass(ID) { initializeFooPass(*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry()); } bool runOnModule(Module& M) { M.dump(); return false; } }; } char Foo::ID = 0;
2010 Apr 21
0
[LLVMdev] Function pointers bitcasted to varargs
Do you compile this as C? In C, unlike in C++, empty parenthesis do not mean "no arguments", they mean "no prototype", which is typically treated the same way as varargs in calling conventions. To declare function with no arguments do typedef void (*FP)(void); Eugene On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > >
2011 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] Is va_arg deprecated?
I should have been more specific: "Why do we want this as an option? Do we want it on all the time? Why or why not?" -eric On Aug 17, 2011, at 3:02 PM, Will Dietz wrote: > To get clang to emit va_arg instructions for va_arg() calls, as > opposed to manually lowering it in the frontend, same as the llvm-gcc > patch sent earlier does. > > ~Will > > On Wed, Aug
2011 May 12
0
[LLVMdev] Machine Function Pass
On 5/12/11 11:46 AM, Arushi Aggarwal wrote: > I tried > llc -load /localhome/aggarwa4/llvm27/llvm-obj/projects/poolalloc/Debug/lib/libCodegen.so > --help > > But this does not show my pass. It says it is an unknown command line argument. I'm assuming you've looked at other MachineFunctionPass'es and have registered yours in the same way that they do. I don't think
2010 Mar 09
0
[LLVMdev] Alignment for Alloca Inst in llvm 2.6
On 8 March 2010 19:51, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > > 2. I notice that the setAlignment method for an AllocaInst takes an > unsigned. For 64 bit systems, alignment could potentially be larger. Is > there a reason why the alignment should be restricted to this size? > Thanks in advance > Would it ever be practical to align a stack variable to an 8 GiB
2011 May 23
0
[LLVMdev] Fwd: getCanonicalInductionVariable
Forwarding to list :) ~Will ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Malveeka Tewari <mtewari at eng.ucsd.edu> Date: Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:38 AM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] getCanonicalInductionVariable To: willdtz at gmail.com Adding -mem2reg fixed the problem ! Thanks a lot! Malveeka On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Will Dietz <willdtz at gmail.com> wrote: > > Also, make