similar to: [LLVMdev] assert in InnerLoopVectorizer::createEmptyLoop

Please file a bug for these types of issues. On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: > I am seeing an assert when I compile the attached program with clang: > > $ clang -fno-strict-aliasing -target mips64el-unknown-linux -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -S test1.c -o test1.ll -emit-llvm > > > It asserts when LoopVectorize.cpp:506 is

I am seeing an assert when I run this command: $ clang -fno-strict-aliasing -target mips64el-unknown-linux -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -S oggenc.i -o oggenc.ll -emit-llvm It asserts when LoopVectorize.cpp:506 is executed. It looks like it is complaining because it is trying to zero-extend an i64 (type Count->getType() returns i64) to an i32 (IdxTy). if (Count->getType() != IdxTy) { //

I need to create a cast instruction that casts an sbyte* to another pointer type. Previously I was using the CastInst::createInferredCast() function to do that; however, that function has been removed. Which of the create() functions from CastInst should I use to do that? It seems like the obdvious answer should be createPointerCast(). However, the documentation for createPointerCast

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

virtual std::vector<Value *> getESetArgumentosFunc(Function *F){ std::vector<Value *> varg_list; varg_list.clear(); for(Function::arg_iterator arg_iti = F->getArgumentList().begin(), arg_ite = F->getArgumentList().end(); arg_iti != arg_ite; ++arg_iti){ Value *para = ConstantInt::get(IntegerType::get(getGlobalContext(),32), 0); *Value *val2 = cast<*

On 10/6/11 12:40 PM, Rafael Baldiati Parizi wrote: > virtual std::vector<Value *> getESetArgumentosFunc(Function *F){ > std::vector<Value *> varg_list; > varg_list.clear(); > for(Function::arg_iterator arg_iti = F->getArgumentList().begin(), > arg_ite = F->getArgumentList().end(); arg_iti != arg_ite; ++arg_iti){ > Value *para = >

Hi, I'm pursuing M.Tech course. As a part of the project work i'm using LLVM as back-end. My project area is "Enhancing the performance of V8 javascript engine using LLVM as a back-end". Now i'm writing code for shift left(SHL) operator. I had my own Value Structure .. it's like this Struct Value { void *val ; char type; } The "char type" holds

On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 3:46 PM, sarath chandra <sarathcse19 at gmail.com>wrote: > Hi James, > > First i converted the void * to int* and then did FPToSI...then did SHL...( > because CreateShl only accepts integers... i pointer casted it to int64 type > first)... Below is the code snippet.... > > > lhs = mBuilder.CreateStructGEP(firstArg, 0); > lhs =

Hello. Mikhail, with the more recent version of the LoopVectorize.cpp code (retrieved at the beginning of July 2016) I ran the following piece of C code: void foo(long *A, long *B, long *C, long N) { for (long i = 0; i < N; ++i) { C[i] = A[i] + B[i]; } } The vectorized LLVM program I obtain contains 2 vector.body blocks - one named

Hi Sarath, It would have really helped if you had removed the commented out code and inlined the calls to your homemade helper functions before sending it... You are doing this, in LLVM IR: %0 = getelementptr %Value* %firstArg, i32 0 ; i8** %1 = load i8** %0 ; i8* %2 = bitcast i8* %1 to i64* %3 = getelementptr %Value* %secondArg, i32 0 ; i8** %4 = load i8** %3; i8* %5 = bitcast i8* %4 to i64*

Yeah, that's the fault...got the answer...... Thanks James for the help... Struggling with this for so many days....... On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:02 PM, James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Sarath,**** > > ** ** > > It would have really helped if you had removed the commented out code and > inlined the calls to your homemade helper functions before

On 03/14/2017 12:11 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: > >> On Mar 14, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov >> <mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: >> >> >> On 03/14/2017 11:21 AM, Adam Nemet wrote: >>> >>>> On Mar 14, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com >>>> <mailto:Ashutosh.Nema at

Summarizing the discussion on the implementation approaches. Discussed about two approaches, first running ‘InnerLoopVectorizer’ again on the epilog loop immediately after vectorizing the original loop within the same vectorization pass, the second approach where re-running vectorization pass and limiting vectorization factor of epilog loop by metadata. <Approach-2> Challenges with

After playing a bit with the newly introduced hardware loop framework I realize that the llvm.set.loop.iterations intrinsic takes as argument the number of iterations the loop will execute. In fact it goes all the way to, on IR, insert an addition of constant 1 to the number of taken backedges returned by SCEV. If the machine instruction realizing the loop is interested in the number of

On 03/14/2017 11:21 AM, Adam Nemet wrote: > >> On Mar 14, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com >> <mailto:Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com>> wrote: >> >> Summarizing the discussion on the implementation approaches. >> Discussed about two approaches, first running ‘InnerLoopVectorizer’ >> again on the epilog loop immediately after

Hi, all I want to create a function in LLVM IR, whose type is: void _to_prof( FILE* ptrF); I do it within LLVM, but I don't know how build the parameter type for FILE* ptrF. Best Regards. Eric Lu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140627/c49bdb2a/attachment.html>

On 03/14/2017 11:58 AM, Michael Kuperstein wrote: > I'm still not sure about this, for a few reasons: > > 1) I'd like to try to treat epilogue loops the same way regardless of > whether the main loop was vectorized by hand or automatically. So if > someone hand-wrote an avx-512 16-wide loop, with alias checks, and we > decide it's profitable to vectorize the

Hi Alex, I think the changes you want are actually not vectorizer related. Vectorizer just uses data provided by other passes. What you probably might want is to look into routine Loop::getStartLoc() (see lib/Analysis/LoopInfo.cpp). If you find a way to improve it, patches are welcome:) Thanks, Michael > On Jun 3, 2016, at 6:13 PM, Alex Susu <alex.e.susu at gmail.com> wrote: >

On 03/14/2017 07:50 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: > >> On Mar 14, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov >> <mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 03/14/2017 12:11 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: >>> >>>> On Mar 14, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov >>>> <mailto:hfinkel at

> > > > We may need some additional info. What kind of additional info? > I haven't put a ton of thought into > this, but I'm hoping we can either (a) use debug info as is or add some > extra (valid) debug info to support this, or (b) add an extra > debug-info-like section to instrumented binaries with the information we > need. > I'd try this data