similar to: [LLVMdev] GSOC Proposal: Implement Decoupled Software Pipeline

Hi all, Apparently some people had trouble joining today. I also had trouble using the attendee ID provided by webex. I've canceled the meeting series and will be scheduling a new one with an updated link. Please remember to update your calendars with the new invite. My apologies to those who couldn't join today, and to everyone for the churn. Today's Meeting Minutes:

Hi! I'm writing my own project in LLVM and I came across a document describing Decoupled software pipelining algorithm written in LLVM by The Liberty Research Group for their VELOCITY C++ compiler: http://liberty.princeton.edu/Research/DSWP/ http://liberty.princeton.edu/Publications/micro38_dswp.pdf and some of spectacular results: http://liberty.princeton.edu/videos/gimp.php

0 down vote favorite [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9354312/llvm-2-8-dswp-core-dump-linux#] share [g+] share [fb] share [tw] i new in llvm.i just compile google code and got this error. " Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: opt -load /home/vahid/mywork/llvm-2.8/Release/lib/DSWP.so -dswp obj.o -o out.o 1. Running pass 'Function Pass Manager'

Hi Vahid, I suggest you use a more recent version. The latest version is 3.0. Ciao, Duncan. On 20/02/12 09:27, vahid eslami wrote: > > 0 down vote favorite > <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9354312/llvm-2-8-dswp-core-dump-linux#> > share [g+] share [fb] share [tw] > > i new in llvm.i just compile google code and got this error. " Stack dump: 0. > Program

I am MSc student and my thesis subject is "parallelization of sequential program in thread level to run on multi-core processors". I want automatically parallelize sequential program in thread level to run on multi-core processors with software pipelining. I've use LLVM to code analysis and translate code to IR, I could extract PDG graph form IR code and convert it to SCCDAG and

Hello, guys. I am trying to construct higher-level 'for' from the low-level LLVM bitcode(ver 1.9). It's partly successful thanks to David A. Greene's advice suggested to use Control Dependence Graph(CDG). I could find which BB contributes to form which loop with CDG. For example, for this simple function: ----------------------------------------------------------- void bsloop(int

Hi, neda > But for final step and code generation, I don't have any idea and > information to assign partitions and communications to threads. and I stop > in this position. Unfortunately I don’t have enough time and I am under > force to complete the project. What you want to do is pretty much like what DSWP does, see http://liberty.princeton.edu/Research/DSWP/ What

I ran across an interesting case and wanted to share it. I'm not proposing any particular changes, but the experience seemed interesting to discuss. First, a bit of background. An LLVM Loop models a specific type of cycle in the CFG. Not all cycles are Loops. Many of our optimization transforms are phrased over loops, which means that a non-loop cycle tends to be less well optimized.

Hello, I'm studying how the SCEV analyzis works and how to use it and I could not create an example where the SCEV analyzis identifies an expression as "SCEVAddRecExpr". Aren't the expressions below the kind of pattern that should be represented as a "AddRecExpr" ? SCEV: (1 + (2 * %3) or SCEV: (%1 + (2 * %3) or SCEV: (%1 + (%2 * %3) In my experiments they are

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sep 3, 2009, at 4:15 AM, Hans Vandierendonck wrote: > Hi, >> >> I am using the scc_iterator class in my code on a CallGraph, where some >> functions are not called from within the module. It seems that >> scc_iterator does not list all SCCs if the graph is not connected; only >> those nodes connected to the node pointed to by >>

Hey, Thank you for your replies, Chris and Dan. Chris Lattner wrote: >> I am considering writing a patch for LoopInfo instead of creating my own >> data structure for irreducible loops. >> Is such an enhancement desired or even already implemented by someone >> (e.g. in the 2.6 branch)? > I'm not sure that this is a good idea. LoopInfo is clearly defined to >

----- Mensagem Original -----=20 Eu boicotaria estas empresas s=F3 pelo fato de financiarem os enjoativos e = rancentos Cassetas, mas me surpreendi ao descobrir que tantos produtos que = eu costumo comprar s=E3o transg=EAnicos. Fui conferir no site do greenpeace= e =E9 verdade!!!!!!!!!!!!! Boicote neles! ----- Original Message -----=20 C A M P A N H A=20 N A T A L S E M B A I X A R I A

Hi, Is there a way to use LLVM to build the visual representation of program dependence graph (PDG) of a routine/program? >From looking at https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/poolalloc/branches/release_14/lib/DSA/PgmDependenceGraph.cpp, it looks like there is an incomplete implementation of PDG in LLVM. However, when I search within LLVM3.0 package, I don't find the .cpp/h code. So, I also

Hello, Any help on the following issue will be appreciated. How do I delete files or directories in my first level of directory that is specified as host. Here is an example : rsync -avz --delete ${SOURCE_HOST}:/mlinkfam/extract/sccs/pa/* /mlinkfam/extract/sccs/pa Giving above command I find redundant files or directory not getting deleted from the first level of target directory

Hi all, I have one analysis pass that I want to perform on call graph SCCs. However, for each function in the SCC, I need function-level analyses, like the dominator tree and the memory dependency analysis. I’ve been told before <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30059622/using-dominatortreewrapperpass-in-callgraphsccpass> that these were not available from a CallGraphSCCPass. What would

Hello, Has anyone written R functions for applying self-controlled case series methods (http://statistics.open.ac.uk/sccs/). In fact only thing needed is to modify glm function to allow absorption of effect. Eg. in Poisson model individual effect is used as factor, but it is considered as nuisance term where parameter estimates are not needed. Could anyone point how absorbing individual

Dear llvmers I'm trying to port some code that was written for llvm 3.1 to 3.4.2. I'm having two linking problems and I couldn't find the source of the problem. Usually it is an error for a virtual method not declared. The error starts even when changing llvm version from 3.1 to 3.2. The current line declaring an command line option: ----- static cl::opt<string>

On Sun, 2 May 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > I don't see moving the repository to another system and forking the code > base as equivalent. I agree that its definitely not time to fork the > code base. But we can change the source code control repository without > forking. Sure, I didn't mean to say they were equivalent, it's just that they would both solve this problem.

I have a FunctionPass F that needs a list of all the SCCs for use in its doFinalization() method. Let's say I write a CallGraphSCCPass C that creates an array of all SCCs. Let C be required by F, and let F call getAnalysis<C>() from its doFinalization() method. Am I guaranteed that C's runOnSCC() method will have executed on all SCCs before F's doFinalization() method?

Hi Ryan, On 9/29/06, Ryan M. Lefever <lefever at crhc.uiuc.edu> wrote: > I have a FunctionPass F that needs a list of all the SCCs for use in its > doFinalization() method. Let's say I write a CallGraphSCCPass C that > creates an array of all SCCs. Let C be required by F, and let F call > getAnalysis<C>() from its doFinalization() method. Am I guaranteed that >