similar to: [LLVMdev] why functionattrs doesn't add dependency of AliasAnalysis

Dear lazydev, I'm writing an instrumentation pass that depends on AliasAnalysis. My getAnalysisUsage() looks as follows: 2453 void ThreadSanitizer::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { 2454 AU.addRequired<TargetData>(); 2455 AU.addRequired<AliasAnalysis>(); 2456 } and the pass initialization: 2668 char ThreadSanitizer::ID = 0; 2669

Hi Alexander, I had the same error: sincos: /home/marcusmae/rpmbuild/BUILD/llvm/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:635: void llvm::PMTopLevelManager::schedulePass(llvm::Pass*): Assertion `PI && "Expected required passes to be initialized"' failed. The solution was to add: PassRegistry &Registry = *PassRegistry::getPassRegistry(); initializeCore(Registry);

I am trying to add an analysis pass as a FunctionPass, and let LICM (LoopPass) depends upon it. So in LICM.cpp, I have the following: virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.setPreservesCFG(); AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>(); AU.addRequiredID(LoopSimplifyID); AU.addRequired<AliasAnalysis>();

On Oct 30, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 10/30/2012 4:10 PM, Ashwin kumar wrote: >> >> Assertion failed: (PI && "Expected required passes to be initialized"), >> function schedulePass, file PassManager.cpp, line 597. >> >> >> I register the passes using RegisterPass function call.

I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this : virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.setPreservesCFG(); AU.addRequired<DominatorTree>(); AU.addRequired<LoopInfo>();

Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> writes: > Your decompose vector patch works perfect on my site. Unfortunately, I > still get stupid code because llvm '-dse' fails followed by > 'decompose-vector' . > I read the DSE code and it is definitely capable of eliminating unused > memory stores if its AA works. I don't think basic AA works for me. I > found

Hi, Richard, Your decompose vector patch works perfect on my site. Unfortunately, I still get stupid code because llvm '-dse' fails followed by 'decompose-vector' . I read the DSE code and it is definitely capable of eliminating unused memory stores if its AA works. I don't think basic AA works for me. I found my program have complex memory accesses, such as bi-dimentional

Hello, I am trying to simplify the CFG of a given code and eliminate the conditionals, even though I will obtain codes that are not semantically equivalent. For example, given a simple loop: for(i=0; i<N; i++){    a[i] = i;     if (i%2==0)       a[i] += 12; } I would keep only the loop, without the if statement: for(i=0; i<N; i++){    a[i] = i; } I can eliminate such conditionals on

Hey all, I'm working on adding interprocedural FunctionAttrs optimization ( http://llvm-cs.pcc.me.uk/lib/Transforms/IPO/FunctionAttrs.cpp) to ThinLTO so it does something similar to what LTO is doing ( https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33648). I've hit a problem with how the FunctionAttrs optimization expects linkage types. In ThinLTO since the linkage type is set to External or

Hi Charles, On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org> wrote: >> I'm working on adding interprocedural FunctionAttrs optimization >> (http://llvm-cs.pcc.me.uk/lib/Transforms/IPO/FunctionAttrs.cpp) to ThinLTO >> so it does something similar to what LTO is doing >> (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33648). I've hit a problem

Hi all, I would like to know which optimization passes are performed at -O2 by opt. So I used following command: llvm-as < /dev/null | opt -O2 -std-compile-opts -disable-output -debug-pass=Arguments I've got following output for LLVM opt 2.9: Pass Arguments: -no-aa -tbaa -basicaa -simplifycfg -domtree -scalarrepl -early-cse Pass Arguments: -targetlibinfo -no-aa -tbaa -basicaa

0 down vote favorite <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34049511/how-to-pass-optimization-passes-to-clang#> I'm trying to debug an issue for a new target where a testcase fails with -O1 optimization and passes with -O0 optimization. I got a list of optimization passes being performed when 'clang -O1' is called like this: llvm-as < /dev/null | opt -O1 -disable-output

Nick Lewycky wrote: > I was sure that I remember "opt -functionattrs" being taught to do this, > but I just tried it out and it doesn't. This is a missed optz'n > opportunity, testcase: > > @x = constant i32 0 > define void @foo() { > load i32* @x > ret void > } > > is only marked readonly when it should be readnone. Could

Thanks for the answer Nick. Now you got me on a chase through FunctionAttrs.cpp trying to find out what analysis passes "... which answers no to everything", means. :-) Garrison On Sep 10, 2011, at 13:52, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Nick Lewycky wrote: >> I was sure that I remember "opt -functionattrs" being taught to do this, >> but I just tried it out and it

On Dec 14, 2011, at 7:09 AM, David Gardner wrote: > I'm attempting to add some support for hoisting/sinking of memory-using > intrinsics in loops, and so I want to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in > LICM, but when I modify getAnalysisUsge to include this : > > virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { > AU.setPreservesCFG(); >

Hi, I am trying to chain two transform passes. ** The first pass is a function pass which requires the 'memory dependence pass' . ** The second pass is a function pass which requires the first pass above. The passes run fine when executed alone. I get the following error when I try to run my second pass with the following code added > > void

Thanks to you both. On my Linux (centos6) system, I have reproduce a variant of the bug and learned about -plugin-opt=-debug-pass=Arguments which I infer from comments is intended to built arguments to “opt” however I found that some of the arguments don’t seem to be quite correct. I assume this just minor bit rot. bin/opt -o pass1.bc -datalayout -notti -basictti -x86tti -targetlibinfo

Hi, I am trying to write my own command-line tool which would use alias analysis in a CallGraphSCCPass. Firstly, I inherit a class AnalysisDriver from CallGraphSCCPass. Then, I implement my own runOnFunction method which tries to get alias analysis from each function. The code is shown as follows: *class AnalysisDriver : public CallGraphSCCPass {* * static char Pid;* * PassManager

On 2009-06-29 11:16, Wenzhi Tao wrote: > Hi, all > > According to the document "LLVM Alias Analysis Infrastructure", I > evaluated the AA performance by using the paramenters '-basicaa -ds-aa > -anders-aa'. The source code 'test.c' is listed as follow: > [...] > The whole process: > > llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -O0 -c test.c -o test.bc > > opt

add -basicaa to your command line :) On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Willy WOLFF <willy.mh.wolff at gmail.com> wrote: > I play a bit more with MemoryDependenceAnalysis by wrapping my pass, and > call explicitely BasicAliasAnalysis. Its still using No Alias Analysis. > > How can I let MemoryDependenceAnalysis use BasicAliasAnalysis? > > Please, find attached my pass. >