similar to: [LLVMdev] Help regarding basic blocks in LLVM

Is there a way to combine basic blocks in LLVM? I want to form Extended Basic Blocks in LLVM.

Hi all, I'm doing some simple profiling with LLVM's profile.pl script in the llvm/utils/ directory. Some of the applications that I'm profiling are potentially very large, which in turn leads to some basic blocks being executed more than ~4 Billion (i.e. 2^32) times. Apparently the internal counters used within this profiler have only 32 bits as evidenced by the following simple

Hi, Thank you guys for helping me out with my previous questions. I am new to LLVM, and I'm getting stuck trying to do some basic stuff: Currently, I'm trying to move all the basic blocks of one function into another one, and at some point insert a branch into the moved function's entry point. The best way which I've found is to use CloneBasicBlock (from Cloning.h). However, I

On Oct 18, 2011, at 2:53 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Hello, > > I'm working on basic-block placement optimizations based on branch probability information. I've run into a stumbling block though. One of the existing passes to do this, essentially a dead pass 'block-placement' operates on the IR, reordering the blocks of the function, and relying on the code generator

On Oct 18, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com> wrote: > I think this should really live as a CodeGen pass. Is there any good reason to make it an IR pass? > > So, as it happens, I was *completely* wrong here. CodeGen correctly preserves the ordering of blocks from IR, *unless* it can do folding,

Hi LLVM developers, I've been beginning to work with LLVM and I'm interested to know if there is a programmatic way to extract the control flow graph and/or basic blocks from LLVM/clang in order to do some analysis on them. Is there a way to get that ? thank you in advance. Regards, Kulkarni Ashish A.College of Engineering, PuneIndia. -------------- next part

Hello, I'm working on basic-block placement optimizations based on branch probability information. I've run into a stumbling block though. One of the existing passes to do this, essentially a dead pass 'block-placement' operates on the IR, reordering the blocks of the function, and relying on the code generator to preserve that order unless it has a reason to rearrange it. This

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com> wrote: > On Oct 18, 2011, at 2:53 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I'm working on basic-block placement optimizations based on branch > probability information. I've run into a stumbling block though. One of the > existing passes to do this, essentially a dead pass

On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> As for why it should be an IR pass, mostly because once the selection dag runs through the code, we can never recover all of the freedom we have at the IR level. To start with, splicing MBBs around requires known about the terminators (which we only some of the time do), and it requires re-writing them a touch to account for the

On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > Ok, I think I have a working pass that is based much more on what we've > talked about here. The patch is attached. I'd love to commit it soon-ish and > then start tweaking it based on feedback from you, others, and looking at > how it actually works in the wild. After chatting briefly

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk>wrote: > > On Oct 18, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com>wrote: > >> I think this should really live as a CodeGen pass. Is there any good >> reason to make it an IR pass? >> > > So, as it

On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: >> This is still *very* much a rough draft, but it's probably better to review that the previous patch. One big caveat, I know I have an iteration bug in here somewhere that is inf-looping. Just ran out of steam debugging it, will pick it back up again later today to shake it out. > > Some random notes: > > - Please

Ok, I think I have a working pass that is based much more on what we've talked about here. The patch is attached. I'd love to commit it soon-ish and then start tweaking it based on feedback from you, others, and looking at how it actually works in the wild. It's essentially a re-write, so it may be hard to read... Let me know if some other form would be easier. Some responses to your

On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > A new patch is attached that is *much* less of a rough draft. Sorry for any confusion due to the early state of the patch. Thanks, Chandler. This is great stuff. > Still, I never intended this to be on-by-default at first. This is a starting point, that I hope can be improved into something that is on-by-default eventually, but

Hi, I would like to learn the details regarding what exactly PGO does for basic block layout/code placement optimizations in llvm. Could you please point me to some descriptions? Is it close to this paper (Karl Pettis and Robert C. Hansen. 1990. Profile guided code positioning. PLDI'90) http://perso.ensta-paristech.fr/~bmonsuez/Cours/B6-4/Articles/papers15.pdf? Whether it is purely

Thanks for all of the comments Andy and Jakob. A new patch is attached that is *much* less of a rough draft. Sorry for any confusion due to the early state of the patch. Also, many many thanks to Jakob for his explanation of how the branches between MBBs should be handled, and Andy, Jim, and Eric who helped answer my questions on IRC when I ran into stumbling blocks. Also, Nick, who shoulder

Murali, Please send LLVM questions to llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu . On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:41:10PM -0400, Murali Krishna Nethi wrote: > Thanks for your reply. I was able to download llvm-tv using the > directions that you had provided to me. > > I have read the whole documentation of llvm yet, have simple question > about llvm. > > I was trying to analyse a simple hello.c

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk>wrote: > >> >> On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> >> As for why it should be an IR pass, mostly because once the selection >>> dag runs through the code, we can never

On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:50 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Ok, wow that wasn't hard at all. Awesome ;-) > This is still *very* much a rough draft, but it's probably better to review that the previous patch. One big caveat, I know I have an iteration bug in here somewhere that is inf-looping. Just ran out of steam debugging it, will pick it back up again later today to shake it out.

Hello All, I have some data tied to the basic blocks in a function, and after inlining that function, I'd like to recover that data in the inlined version. Is there some way to match up the inlined version of the function with the original basic blocks? Thanks, Jeremy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: