similar to: [LLVMdev] opt -debug not working

Hi, You might want to try running -loops -loop-simplify before loop unroll. >From loop simplify.cpp This pass performs several transformations to transform natural loops into a00011 // simpler form, which makes subsequent analyses and transformations simpler and00012 // more effective. Arushi On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> wrote: > You

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

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

Hi, you need to run some optimization passes first. (like -O2) 2011/5/3 Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com> > I just want to try loop-unroll and see corresponding changes in the bitcode > file. For that any loop will do. Have you been able to test llvm loop-unroll > successfully? > > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Yuan Pengfei <coolypf at qq.com> wrote: >

You mean like *llvm-gcc-4.2 -O2 -emit-llvm Hello.c -c -o Hello.bc* But still i am not able to observe any effect on bit code by running *opt-2.8 -loop-unroll Hello.bc -o Hello_unroll.bc* On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Zakk <zakk0610 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, you need to run some optimization passes first. (like -O2) > > 2011/5/3 Manish Gupta <mgupta.iitr at gmail.com>

On 10/1/11 11:01 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > Dear All, > > I am trying to use DataStructure Alias Analysis. From the code at > poolalloc it seems that rDSA needs to be compiled to get -ds-aa > feature while the Makefile builds just the DSA. I seem to recall replying to this, but my email client says I didn't, so I'm responding again. :) The rDSA code is some experimental

Dear All, I am trying to use DataStructure Alias Analysis. From the code at poolalloc it seems that rDSA needs to be compiled to get -ds-aa feature while the Makefile builds just the DSA. Please correct me if I am doing something wrong. Thanks, Manish -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi all I am trying hello pass in llvm. I have compiled and could generate LLVMHello.so but while giving the pass using opt i am getting below mentioned error. Command used: *opt-2.8 -load ../../cse231_project/llvm/llvm-2.9/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so -hello < hello.bc* Error opening '../../cse231_project/llvm/llvm-2.9/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so':

Hi, > The loop that I am trying it on is: > for(i=0; i< 1000; i++) > { > c[i] = a[i] + b[i]; > } I can't find any benefit unrolling this loop. ------------------ Yuan Pengfei Peking Unversity, China

I just want to try loop-unroll and see corresponding changes in the bitcode file. For that any loop will do. Have you been able to test llvm loop-unroll successfully? On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Yuan Pengfei <coolypf at qq.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > The loop that I am trying it on is: > > for(i=0; i< 1000; i++) > > { > > c[i] = a[i] + b[i]; > > }

Hi all, I'm working on an AliasAnalysis pass that is loaded as a module. What I'd like to do is something like: opt -my-aa -O3 Where -O3 is whatever set of optimizations I'm using, but they all should use 'my-aa' for their results. However, what appears to happen is it uses my-aa until something invalidates those results and then goes back to basic-aa when something needs

Hi All, My instrumentation code needs to insert calls to transmit Value list. Each element in this list could be of different type. The list is sent to instrumenting function say void recordVarInputValues(int num, ...) . So, I have created a Union type in Tracing.cpp, which I link with my benchmark module at compile time. These steps are similar to giri instrumentation

Thanks Everyone for the info. I am planning to work with DSA on llvm-2.9. Hope it is working as John mentioned. Manish On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:06 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 9/19/11 9:12 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > > Dear All, > > I am curious to know the reason for removal of andersen pointer analysis. > Is it because of some issues? We

Hi everybody, I have a large dataframe similar to this one: knames <-c('ab', 'aa', 'ac', 'ad', 'ab', 'ac', 'aa', 'ad','ae', 'af') kdate <- as.Date( c('20111001', '20111102', '20101001', '20100315', '20101201', '20110105', '20101001', '20110504',

On 8/4/11 1:53 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > It would be great help if someone can point me to similar code in > Analysis or Transform, i.e. tracing value dependencies chains. If I understand correctly, given an instruction I, you want to find its operands o1 through oN, and then find the instructions (or LLVM values) that generate the values o1 through oN, and then find the instructions

The README at the location shared by John says "DSA is undergoing significant changes and may not be entirely stable or correct. See lib/DSA/README" So, I was wondering from where should one pick the code. Although I will start my analysis and see how results turn out to be. But any comments on this line will be helpful. Thanks Manish On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Manish Gupta

What member function to use if I wish to operate on results of an instruction. eg. Instruction %1 = getelementptr inbounds [10 x i32]* %a, i32 0, i32 %0 I->getOperand will give me the operands. How should I get hold of %1? Thanks, Manish -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 8/4/11 2:45 PM, Manish Gupta wrote: > Hey John, > > Yes this is what I am looking for. I wrote a code as I described in my > first mail and I am getting desired result except when the chain > encounters load instruction (you have also mentioned the that u skip > loads). Okay. Just out of curiosity, is your static slice local (stopping at function arguments) or

On Jun 24, 2010, at 9:55 AM, Will Dietz wrote: > > Short of running -my-aa -gvn -my-aa -dse -my-aa -licm... etc, is there > a good way to do this? No. > > Having thought about it, it seems less surprising than it did > originally, but perhaps this should be mentioned somewhere? Probably. I added some text to docs/AliasAnalysis.html in r106776 for the issues that I ran into

Hey John, Yes this is what I am looking for. I wrote a code as I described in my first mail and I am getting desired result except when the chain encounters load instruction (you have also mentioned the that u skip loads). I think the recursive trace back for a Value V depending on Operands (o1,...oN) should terminate at the nearest definition of the oN (i.e. it is not an instruction but a LLVM