Displaying 20 results from an estimated 5000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Resolving sizeof's; target triples; type optimizations"
2011 Oct 27
0
[LLVMdev] Resolving sizeof's; target triples; type optimizations
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Harel Cain <harel.cain at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A few different though somewhat related questions here. I'm really grateful
> for your answers!
>
> 1. From a previous question I know that sizeof's are resolved into literals
> early in the front-end before IR is even emitted. It seems that they are
> resolved into
2011 Oct 27
2
[LLVMdev] Resolving sizeof's; target triples; type optimizations
Thanks for the answers.
> See http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#platformindependent . If you're
> dealing with C code, it isn't too hard to add a new target to clang;
> send an email to cfe-dev if you need help with that. The "target
> datalayout" information is purely a hint to the optimizers.
My experience this far has been mainly with using llvm-gcc and llvmc,
2011 Oct 27
0
[LLVMdev] Resolving sizeof's; target triples; type optimizations
Hello
> In doing this, I'm essentially overriding any "target triple" existing in
> the IR, breaking up the process into a multi-stage operation (llvm-gcc, opt
> and llc running independently) and picking whatever target I want, right?
No. This won't work since, as indicated in the FAQ entry IR derived
from C/C++ is not target neutral, so you cannot 'just'
2012 Mar 04
3
[LLVMdev] Passing arguments to opt via clang
Thanks, but I'm not sure I understand. I see no such flag in clang 2.9 nor
couldn't I find any mention of it. What does it do?
Harel Cain
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 15:03, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info>wrote:
> > In the good old llvmc, the -Wo flag could be used to pass arguments to
> the
> > optimizer. Is there a similar mechanism anywhere for clang?
2010 Dec 05
1
[LLVMdev] Weak private linkage for Objective C
Hi all,
I've been subscribed to this list on-and-off and always found it very
helpful.
I'm facing the problem of compiling a project in Objective C with LLVM in a
Darwin environment. There is a certain Objective C protocol that appears in
two .m files, and so the corresponding l_OBJC_PROTOCOL and
l_OBJC_LABEL_PROTOCOL symbols appear in both .o files.
The problem is that while these
2011 Sep 07
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations in llvm-gcc and llc
Hi all,
I'm trying to prevent two things from happening:
1. Intrinsic memcpy calls of for example 16 bytes in the IR code being
translated into movl commands in x86 assembly code, for example, this code:
call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i32(i8* %3, i8* getelementptr
inbounds ([16 x i8]* @.str1, i32 0, i32 0), i32 16, i32 1, i1 false)
translated into this x86 assembly
movl
2012 Mar 04
2
[LLVMdev] Passing arguments to opt via clang
Hi all,
In the good old llvmc, the -Wo flag could be used to pass arguments to the
optimizer. Is there a similar mechanism anywhere for clang? Is there also a
similar mechanism to -Wllc?
Thanks!
Harel Cain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120304/0e5c7267/attachment.html>
2012 Mar 04
0
[LLVMdev] Passing arguments to opt via clang
On 03/04/2012 02:32 PM, Harel Cain wrote:
> Thanks, but I'm not sure I understand. I see no such flag in clang 2.9
> nor couldn't I find any mention of it. What does it do?
It's called -mllvm.
You can use it like this.
clang -mllvm -vectorize ...
Cheers
Tobi
2011 Jan 27
2
[LLVMdev] Passing command line arguments to optimization passes
Hi all,
I was wondering if there's any way to pass command line arguments to LLVM
optimization passes when run through the opt tool.
For example, suppose I register called MyPass, then I want to run
opt -load libMyPass.so -MyPass 3 < input.bc
and have "3" be available to MyPass as a kind of argv argumnet through some
method.
Or does it take a major rewrite of the opt tool
2012 Mar 04
0
[LLVMdev] Passing arguments to opt via clang
> In the good old llvmc, the -Wo flag could be used to pass arguments to the
> optimizer. Is there a similar mechanism anywhere for clang? Is there also a
> similar mechanism to -Wllc?
-mlvm will handle all of them
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
2011 Jan 24
2
[LLVMdev] How to create an IntegerType of the native word size
Hi all,
I couldn't find any reasonable way to create the IntegerType that would
match, say, intptr_t, that is the native word size of the machine I'm
building on. More accurately defined, when compiling on a 64 bit Mac OS
machine I want it to be Int64Ty, but if for example I'm using the "-arch
i386" command line option on that machine during compilation, I want it to
be
2011 Jan 27
2
[LLVMdev] Passing command line arguments to optimization passes
A follow-up question:
Is there a way to make different passes accept one command line option that
will affect all of them?
For example, I'd like to have a -optStrength parameter, that can be given to
all of my passes simultaneously.
Thanks a lot,
Guy
Arnaud Allard de Grandmaison wrote:
>
> Hi Harel,
>
> Several existing passes can take command line arguments. Have a look at
2012 Feb 20
2
[LLVMdev] Invalid relocation types for Thumb in LLVM version 2.9
Hi all,
I'm trying to figure out a problem with relocation types 1 and 8 (as
observed using otool -r on ARM/Thumb object files). Earlier, when I used
LLVM 2.8 with llc to generate thumb (-march=thumb -mattr=+thumb2) assembly
listings, then assemble those using the gcc of iPhone 4.2 SDK, there wasn't
any problem.
However starting with LLVM 2.9, the same toolchain emits slightly different
2011 Jan 27
0
[LLVMdev] Passing command line arguments to optimization passes
Hi Harel,
Several existing passes can take command line arguments. Have a look at lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnrollPass.cpp for example. Its command line arguments are defined using the cl::opt objects.
Best regards,
--
Arnaud de Grandmaison
________________________________
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Harel Cain
Sent: Thursday, January
2009 Jul 14
3
[LLVMdev] Unexpected failures in the DejaGNU test collection
Hi all,
When using "make check" with the DejaGNU test collection, I encounter
two unexpected failures (they seem to be closely related).
My question: are they well known, and if so what's the problem and how
can I fix it?
This is the error text I get:
FAIL: /var/data/common/trunk/llvm/test/FrontendC/2008-05-19-AlwaysInline.c
Failed with exit(1) at line 1
while running:
2010 Dec 12
2
[LLVMdev] Optimized "opt" on Darwin fails to load dynamic libraries with passes
Hi all,
This is a problem that occurs for me only on Darwin (MacOS) and not on
Linux.
When llvm 2.8 (or 2.9) is compiled with ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1, the "opt" tool
fails to load LLVM passes in dynamic libraries (.dylib) files, regardless of
how they themselves were built. When opt is built with ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=0,
all is well.
Here is some informative output. Seems to me the problem is
2011 Jan 28
0
[LLVMdev] Passing command line arguments to optimization passes
You could make the cl:opt object visible outside one of your passes, and use it in your other passes : in other words, it is a global variable shared between several files.
Best regards,
--
Arnaud de Grandmaison
-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of guyadini
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:38 PM
To: llvmdev at
2012 Feb 20
0
[LLVMdev] Invalid relocation types for Thumb in LLVM version 2.9
The llvm compiler can now generated movt/movw instructions to create 32-bit constants. Those new instructions use new relocations. Mach-o uses different numbering for relocations than ELF does. For mach-o, ARM_RELOC_PAIR=1 and ARM_RELOC_HALF=8. You need a newer linker that understands the new relocations.
-Nick
On Feb 20, 2012, at 5:20 AM, Harel Cain wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm
2009 Jul 14
0
[LLVMdev] Unexpected failures in the DejaGNU test collection
On 14/07/2009, at 12.35, Harel Cain wrote:
> When using "make check" with the DejaGNU test collection, I encounter
> two unexpected failures (they seem to be closely related).
> My question: are they well known, and if so what's the problem and how
> can I fix it?
> FAIL: /var/data/common/trunk/llvm/test/FrontendC/2008-05-19-
> AlwaysInline.c
> FAIL:
2009 Jul 14
1
[LLVMdev] An array of instructions?
Another question today: an array of string literals in my C program
was transformed to independent global variables, each holding one
string, and another array of getelementptr's to them, here it is:
@words= global [5 x i8*] [ i8* getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str11, i32
0, i32 0), i8* getelementptr ([6 x i8]* @.str12, i32 0, i32 0), i8*
getelementptr ([7 x i8]* @.str13, i32 0, i32 0), i8*