similar to: [LLVMdev] Accessing arguments in a caller

What I can think of: 1. Anonymous struct, to avoid a copy. 2. Use stdarg.h...dangerous but accomplishes what you're looking for. 3. Split up F: giant switch statements often indicate that your function is doing several different things. (IMHO...) 4. Don't worry about it, it's probably not a bottleneck. (Or rather, profile first...) But no, there's no standard way to do this. Even

Nella citazione giovedì 18 agosto 2011 09:11:36, Carlo Alberto Ferraris ha scritto: > I need some advice on "forwarding" arguments to a callee. Suppose I have > a function F that is called at the beginning of all other functions in > the module. From F I need to access (read) the arguments passed to its > immediate caller. Right now I do something like boxing all

I need some advice on "forwarding" arguments to a callee. Suppose I have a function F that is called at the beginning of all other functions in the module. From F I need to access (read) the arguments passed to its immediate caller. Right now I do something like boxing all arguments in the caller inside a struct and passing a pointer to the struct to F, alongside an identifier

Nella citazione martedì 2 agosto 2011 22:01:13, Carlo Alberto Ferraris ha scritto: > My question is: > what is the best way to > express such relationships in LLVM IR ("best" in the sense of allowing > other optimizations to run effectively)? Bear in mind that in this > example N=2, but it may be way bigger than that. Just to clarify: I already figured out two ways to

Nella citazione giovedì 7 luglio 2011 19:41:16, John McCall ha scritto: > On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:33 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: >> Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: >>> I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at >>> least attempts to thread across indirect branches. You can either try >>> to fix it or file a

Nella citazione lunedì 1 agosto 2011 08:13:12, Eli Friedman ha scritto: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris > <cafxx at strayorange.com> wrote: >> I'm trying to figure out how to feed a blockaddress to a switch condition >> AND destination (basically emulating an indirectbr via a switch; I know it's >> not a good approach, I'm just

Nella citazione lunedì 22 agosto 2011 11:53:29, Duncan Sands ha scritto: > Hi Carlo, rather than declaring individual stack variables > int x; > int y; > int z; > and so on, which requires you to pass each one, or a pointer to each one, > to your function, declare one stack variable of struct type that holds > them all: > struct StackObjects { > int

Nella citazione venerdì 29 luglio 2011 11:24:47, Duncan Sands ha scritto: > In-register structs and arrays are not intended to be used for large structs and > arrays. Out of curiosity, why would that be the case? -- Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com <mailto:cafxx at strayorange.com>> website/blog <http://cafxx.strayorange.com> - +39 333 7643 235

Nella citazione martedì 2 agosto 2011 20:02:08, Michael Ilseman ha scritto: > I'm assuming that you're talking about a situation where this can't be > determined statically in the existing LLVM IR, but you know it's true > and want to put it in (e.g. you're the one generating LLVM IR). Correct. Or, more precisely, I'd like to investigate macro compression, i.e.

Nella citazione mercoledì 31 agosto 2011 20:35:46, Chris Lattner ha scritto: > On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: >> Quick question: how do I get a list of StructType* defined/used in a Module? I can't seem to find an appropriate iterator in the Module class... > Module::findUsedStructTypes. Note that this requires scanning the entire module, it is not an

On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:15 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > Nella citazione giovedì 7 luglio 2011 19:41:16, John McCall ha scritto: >> On Jul 7, 2011, at 4:33 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: >>> Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: >>>> I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at least attempts to thread across indirect

Il 21/08/2011 19:31, Jordy Rose ha scritto: > What I can think of: > 1. Anonymous struct, to avoid a copy. > 2. Use stdarg.h...dangerous but accomplishes what you're looking for. probably it wasn't clear from my first post: I'm talking about LLVM-IR, not C or C++. > 3. Split up F: giant switch statements often indicate that your function is doing several different things.

Hi Carlo, > Nella citazione lunedì 22 agosto 2011 11:53:29, Duncan Sands ha scritto: >> Hi Carlo, rather than declaring individual stack variables >> int x; >> int y; >> int z; >> and so on, which requires you to pass each one, or a pointer to each one, >> to your function, declare one stack variable of struct type that holds >> them all: >>

I'm assuming that you're talking about a situation where this can't be determined statically in the existing LLVM IR, but you know it's true and want to put it in (e.g. you're the one generating LLVM IR). If that's not the case, then see if JumpThreading will do it for you. I'm not familiar with a way to express exactly what you want to say, but are you opposed to just

I'm trying to figure out how to feed a blockaddress to a switch condition AND destination (basically emulating an indirectbr via a switch; I know it's not a good approach, I'm just experimenting). Suppose I have the following: SwitchInst *s = SwitchInst::Create(...); BasicBlock *bb = ...; PtrToIntInst k = new PtrToIntInst(BlockAddress::get(bb), <TYPE>, "", s);

Suppose I have a bb with N predecessors and N successors. What is, in your opinion, the best way to express that the bb has (dynamically) only one successor (i.e. if coming from the i-th predecessor we will always jump to the i-th successor)? b.r., -- Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com <mailto:cafxx at strayorange.com>> website/blog

LiveVariables is the optimized and tested way to get variable liveness information (it's used by register allocation). Unfortunately it requires a MachineFunction to work - so you'll either need to lower to one of the built-in targets or add your own target to acquire access to this pass. Andrew On 03/31/2011 12:28 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > I've read that LiveValues

Il 07/07/2011 11:14, Cameron Zwarich ha scritto: > I haven't read the code in detail, but it looks like JumpThreading at > least attempts to thread across indirect branches. You can either try > to fix it or file a bug with your test case. In the source it says "If the predecessor is an indirect goto, we can't split the edge.

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris <cafxx at strayorange.com> wrote: > I'm trying to figure out how to feed a blockaddress to a switch condition > AND destination (basically emulating an indirectbr via a switch; I know it's > not a good approach, I'm just experimenting). > Suppose I have the following: > > SwitchInst *s =

On Jun 24, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris wrote: > >> Try building with "make VERBOSE=1", which will show you the command-lines passed to the compiler/linker. Post the output here. > there you go: >> cafxx at ubuntu:~/Projects/llvm2/lib/Transforms/cgf$ make VERBOSE=1 >> llvm[0]: Compiling CGFPass.cpp for Debug+Asserts build (PIC) >> if g++