similar to: [LLVMdev] run -mem2reg and -reg2mem programmably from within a Pass

I guess AU.addRequiredID(DemoteRegisterToMemoryID) would do the trick. - xi On Jun 19, 2011, at 11:03 PM, Chuck Zhao wrote: > I am currently building a BasicBlock pass which requires to run -reg2mem before it, and need to run -mem2reg after it to clean up. > > So, I want to specify -reg2mem as one of the pre-requisite passes to it, as: > > > class MyPass: public

On 10/20/10 6:05 AM, Luke Dalessandro wrote: > I have a transformation where I'd like to use both DominatorTree (for ExtractCodeRegion), and DemoteRegisterToMemory (i.e., reg2mem). The transformation is phased, so all occurrences of getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(Function) happen before any occurrence of getAnalysisID<FunctionPass>(&DemoteRegisterToMemoryID, Function). I

I have a transformation where I'd like to use both DominatorTree (for ExtractCodeRegion), and DemoteRegisterToMemory (i.e., reg2mem). The transformation is phased, so all occurrences of getAnalysis<DominatorTree>(Function) happen before any occurrence of getAnalysisID<FunctionPass>(&DemoteRegisterToMemoryID, Function). If I register these two passes with DominatorTree first, I

Hi, I tried adding the PHI nodes in BB_unique, and it works for the simple case described here, but in case the nodes were declared in some predecessors of ExitBB1 and used in ExitBB1_redirect and its successors, it won't work, unless I create entries for all of them in BB_unique. B1 (declares PHI_1) B3 | | B2

Hi, I work on a pass that requires as input LLVM code without any phi nodes. For this, I use the reg2mem pass which produces suitable code, the pass runs correctly, but I obtain a significant performance decrease. I expect that this is because there are more reads / writes to memory after running the reg2mem pass. How can I optimize the code, without inserting any phi nodes? Or is there a

Hello, I have two for loops (one inside the other), that after indvars, looprotate, etc. (the important here is the loop rotate), is similar to this (I've stripped the real operations): define i32 @f() nounwind { entry: br label %bb1 bb1: ; preds = %bb3, %bb1, %entry %i.0.reg2mem.0.ph = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.0.reg2mem.0.ph, %bb1 ], [ %indvar.next9, %bb3 ] ;

Is there a pass I can use after reg2mem to get rid of occurances like this?: store i32 %cond, i32* %cond.reg2mem %cond.reload = load i32* %cond.reg2mem store i32 %cond.reload, i32* %cond4.reg2mem Essentially, in this case, reg2mem creates an extra memory space to store and load a value from just here, and never uses the value again; since this isn't efficient code, I'm wondering if

I have a register allocation bug I'm trying to track down. It's caused by a convoluted series of events that results in a massive amount of code, so looking at asm diffs is rather unhelpful. I came up with the bright idea of adding a MaxPromotes flag to limit the number of candidates that mem2reg promotes. But I couldn't figure out how to safely promote some candidates but not

Hi. Im exploring `opt -reg2mem` output for a simple C program (actually, that is this snippet: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Dining_philosophers#C - compiled with clang -O1) and got two questions regarding this pass. 1. How would I tell which memory locations were introduced by the pass, and which memory locations were present in the original program? After a brief diffing of .ll files, I'd

Hello, guys. I just tested -reg2mem pass to see how it changes my bitcode. E.g., for the following simple C code: ------------------------------------------------------------- int foo() { int i,j; int sum = 0; for (i=0; i<10; i++) { sum += i; for (j=0; j<3; j++) sum += 2; } return sum; } ------------------------------------------------------------- I could get the

Hi, all I want to instrument load/store operations in LLVM IR. And I find the LLVM IR generated with flag -o3 is much more efficient than -o0, so I try to instrument on these optimized LLVM IR, but, some load operations are changed to Phi loads. Then, I try the -reg2mem flag to remove these phi nodes. The problems are: 1) I use visitLoadInst to collect these load operations, and it seems I

On Fri, 2007-08-10 at 00:51 -0500, Seung Jae Lee wrote: > Hi, guys. > > I'm interested in using reg2mem pass but not sure about the concept of it. > Can you let me know a reference about it, if any? > Forgive my ignorance. -_-; The reg2mem pass undoes SSA form. That is, it turns SSA registers into alloca instructions with loads and stores. > > Thanks, > Seung J.

Hello, I'm trying to apply the reg2mem pass on my bc file, but it somehow adds an instruction before a landingpad instruction and so I get a broken module error: The unwind destination does not have a landingpad instruction! %41 = invoke %class.x* @_ZN10xC2Ev(%class.x* %.reload19) to label %.noexc unwind label %88

Hi, guys. I'm interested in using reg2mem pass but not sure about the concept of it. Can you let me know a reference about it, if any? Forgive my ignorance. -_-; Thanks, Seung J. Lee

Best Regards! Eric Lew On 周三, 4月 22, 2015 at 12:11 下午, David Blaikie < dblaikie at gmail.com [dblaikie at gmail.com] > wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Eric Lu <eirc.lew at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, all > > I want to instrument load/store operations in LLVM IR. And I find the LLVM > IR generated with flag -o3 is much more efficient than -o0, so I try to >

Might have to do with GVN's PRE (partial redundancy elimination), which tends to increase code size. H. ----- Original Message ----- From: Abhinash Jain Sent: 09/22/13 01:17 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Why total number of store instructions increased in case of gvn with reg2mem? Below are the 4 cases out of which for the first 3 cases am able to understand the variation

Below are the 4 cases out of which for the first 3 cases am able to understand the variation on total number of store inst. But when -gvn parameters is passed (in case 4) , why does the total number of strore Instruction present on the attached file increases (instead of decrease). Please explain considering that use of -reg2mem pass is mandatory. eg. clang -emit-llvm bzip.c -c -o bzip1.bc

Hi, I am working on a pass aimed to unify multiple exits of a loop into a unique basic block. The approach is straight forward: I create a unique BasicBlock BB_unique that has as predecessors all the exit blocks of the loop, it contains a phi instruction and a switch to redirect the flow correctly. Additionally, for each initial exit block I create an associated block that will jump to the

Hi, when I delete some instruction, I got some error prompt message. - %i.0.reg2mem.0 = phi i32 [ 0, %bb5 ], [ %indvar.next, %bb12 ] ; <i32> [#uses=2] - %s.0.reg2mem.0 = phi i32 [ 0, %bb5 ], [ %tmp16, %bb12 ] ; <i32> [#uses=1] - %tmp14 = tail call i32 @foobar(i32 %i.0.reg2mem.0) nounwind ; <i32> [#uses=1] - %tmp16 = add i32 %tmp14, %s.0.reg2mem.0 ; <i32>

On 08/03/2011 08:35 AM, Jimborean Alexandra wrote: > Hello Tobi, > > You are right, we need to run some other passes before running the > scalar evolution pass. The sequence that I run for this example is -O3 > -loop-simplify -reg2mem. This is why I did not obtain the expressions > depending on the loop indices. So I removed the reg2mem pass and scalar > evolution computes the