Displaying 20 results from an estimated 500 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] If Conversion and predicated returns"
2013 Apr 10
0
[LLVMdev] If Conversion and predicated returns
On 4/10/2013 12:45 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
>
> Should AnalyzeBranch be enhanced to somehow indicate conditional returns?
I don't think that returns can ever be analyzable (since LLVM's CFG does
not have a designated exit block).
> Alternatively, the diamond conversion routine contains this:
>
> // RemoveExtraEdges won't work if the block has an unanalyzable branch,
2017 Oct 11
2
{ARM} IfConversion does not detect BX instruction as a branch
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 10/9/2017 3:10 AM, Gaël Jobin via llvm-dev wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I got a silly bug when compiling our project with the latest Clang. Here's
> the outputted assembly:
>
> tst r3, #255
> strbeq r6, [r7]
> ldreq r6, [r4, r6, lsl #2]
> strne r6, [r7, #4]
2017 Jan 10
2
[PATCHish] IfConversion; lost edges for some diamonds
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Peter A Jonsson <pj at sics.se> wrote:
> Hi Kyle,
>
> my apologies for mailing you directly but it seems new user creation is
> disabled on the llvm bugzilla.
>
> We sometime lose edges during IfConversion of diamonds and it’s not
> obvious how to reproduce on an upstream target. The documentation for
> HasFallThrough says *may*
2002 Sep 16
4
[LLVMdev] another question
In the section expaining "dyn_cast"
There are following lines of code:
if (AllocationInst *AI = dyn_cast<AllocationInst>(Val)) {
...
}
I cannot understand how you take a operand, a value, and cast
it into a Instruction. Can you explain it for me?
Another common example is:
// Loop over all of the phi nodes in a basic block
BasicBlock::iterator BBI =
2005 Oct 17
1
smbcacls add fails 3.0.20a
Hi all!
I have a problem setting ACLs on a remote file on a Windows XP Pro
SP2 box.
I issue the following command:
smbcacls -a 'ACL:BBI-DEV\beakid:ALLOWED/0/0x00100116' -U 'BBI-DEV
\Admin' //BBI-DEV/Data /Niva.txt
And I get this response from debug level 3.
Password:
Connecting to host=BBI-DEV
Connecting to 192.168.1.124 at port 445
Doing spnego session setup (blob
2005 Oct 14
1
smbcacls add acl fails 3.0.20
Hi all!
I have a problem setting ACLs on a remote file on a Windows XP Pro
SP2 box.
I issue the following command:
smbcacls -a 'ACL:BBI-DEV\beakid:ALLOWED/0/0x00100116' -U 'BBI-DEV
\Admin' //BBI-DEV/Data /Niva.txt
And I get this response from debug level 3.
Password:
Connecting to host=BBI-DEV
Connecting to 192.168.1.124 at port 445
Doing spnego session setup (blob
2011 Nov 01
2
[LLVMdev] Adding a custom GC safe point creation phase
Thanks for the review Gordon.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com>wrote:
> On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote:
>
> > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it
> wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today
> in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if
2011 Nov 01
0
[LLVMdev] Adding a custom GC safe point creation phase
On Nov 1, 2011, at 4:47 AM, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the review Gordon.
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote:
> On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote:
>
> > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points.
2014 Jul 31
2
[LLVMdev] suspicious typo in MCObjectDisassembler.cpp
my compiler gave me a warning in MCObjectDisassembler.cpp. it found a
self-comparation in loop condition. I think it's a typo.
the suspicious code was introduced by this patch:
>From f176482752fbea3139394e280adfb10270dd3aac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ahmed Bougacha <ahmed.bougacha at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 07:28:55 +0000
Subject: MC CFG: Support disassembly at
2016 Sep 07
2
[PowerPC] Recent branch too far breakage
I'm using a recent revision of TOT (280704) to build clang/LLVM for
PowerPC64 little endian. I'm getting an assembler error when building
PPCInstPrinter.cpp:
The error is:
/tmp/PPCInstPrinter-84c835.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/PPCInstPrinter-84c835.s:7671: Error: operand out of range
(0x0000000000008004 is not between 0xffffffffffff8000 and
0x0000000000007ffc)
The offending line is
2014 Jul 31
2
[LLVMdev] suspicious typo in MCObjectDisassembler.cpp
Any chance of adding some missing test coverage here? That code was
dead (& evidently untested) before...
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe you are correct. Fixed thusly:
>
> dzur:~/sources/llvm> git svn dcommit
> Committing to https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk ...
> M
2006 Mar 17
3
[LLVMdev] Stupid '-load-vn -licm' question (LLVM 1.6)
On Mar 16, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Eric Kidd wrote:
>> The duplicate loads appear at the top of the %regex6 and %regex2
>> blocks below. I've tried various alias analysis implementations
>> either alone or in combination.
>
> LICM doesn't remove common subexpressions, also -load-vn doesn't
> affect LICM. Try
2014 Jun 17
2
[LLVMdev] Question about 'DuplicateInstruction' function of TailDuplicatePass in CodeGen
Hi all,
I have faced a little bit of a strange transformation from the
TailDuplicatePass In CodeGen. When the pass clones the contents of
TailBB into PredBB, the bundled instructions in TailBB are not bundled
in PredBB. I think the reason why it is not bundled is that the
'DuplicateInstruction' function does not set up the flag of the first
instruction of the bundle in PredBB when it
2016 Sep 07
2
[PowerPC] Recent branch too far breakage
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hal Finkel via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Richard Pennington" <rich at pennware.com>
> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 7:37:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [PowerPC] Recent branch too far breakage
>
> Hi Rich,
>
> It is hard to tell, but there
2020 May 05
2
Missing vectorization of loop due to load late in the loop
Hi,
TL;DR: A loop doesn't get vectorized due to the interaction of loop-
rotate, licm and instcombine. What to do about it?
Full story:
In the benchmarks for our out-of-tree target we have a case that we
would like to get vectorized, but currently it isn't. I've done some
digging to see why and have some kind of idea what prevents it, but I
don't know what the best way to fix
2002 Sep 16
0
[LLVMdev] another question
Also sprach xli3 at uiuc.edu:
} In the section expaining "dyn_cast"
} There are following lines of code:
} if (AllocationInst *AI = dyn_cast<AllocationInst>(Val)) {
} ...
} }
} I cannot understand how you take a operand, a value, and cast
} it into a Instruction. Can you explain it for me?
}
} Another common example is:
}
} // Loop over all of the phi nodes
2012 Nov 01
0
[LLVMdev] : Predication on SIMD architectures and LLVM
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Bjorn De Sutter wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am working on a CGRA backend (something like a 2D VLIW), and we also absolutely need predication. I extended the IfConversion pass to allow it to be executed multiple times and to predicate already predicated code. This is necessary to predicate code with nested conditional statements. At this point, we
2012 Oct 31
3
[LLVMdev] : Predication on SIMD architectures and LLVM
Hi all,
I am working on a CGRA backend (something like a 2D VLIW), and we also absolutely need predication. I extended the IfConversion pass to allow it to be executed multiple times and to predicate already predicated code. This is necessary to predicate code with nested conditional statements. At this point, we support or, and, and conditional predicates (see Scott Mahlke's papers on this
2011 Nov 23
0
[LLVMdev] GC plugin: Not add (postcall) safe point after tail-call
Hi all,
I have implemented a GC plugin and i want to exclude Tail-call instructions
from being considered as Safe Points. For that reason I have overwritten
the "findCustomSafePoints" function with something like that:
bool ErlangGC::findCustomSafePoints(GCFunctionInfo &FI, MachineFunction
&MF) {
for (MachineFunction::iterator BBI = MF.begin(),
2008 Jun 11
0
[LLVMdev] Possible miscompilation?
On 2008-06-11, at 13:16, Gary Benson wrote:
> Duncan Sands wrote:
>
>> Can you please attach IR which can be compiled to an executable
>> (and shows the problem).
>
> I've been generating functions using a builder and then compiling
> them with ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction(). Is there some way
> I can get compilable IR from that?