similar to: [LLVMdev] Suggestion on simple optimization pass for a beginner?

On 10/6/13 7:23 AM, Rekha R wrote: > Hello, > > I am a beginner in LLVM development with the aim of writing a new > optimization pass. But then before I could do that, I thought of > writing simple passes. I could successfully implement the Hello pass > as given in the doc. Then I wrote a simple Constant Folding pass - > evaluate instructions of the form c=10+20 and

This sounds good. Similar to Constant folding. Noted :-) Rekha On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, David Tweed <david.tweed at arm.com> wrote: > Hi,**** > > ** ** > > If you're looking for something incredibly simple to get started with it > might be fruitful to implement replacement of particular function calls of > constant arguments with the appropriate result.

Thank you David for prompt reply. I tried with SmallVector. I inserted elements with push_back(). But when I retrieve elements using pop_back_val the elements are returned in reverse order of insertion (I mean like LIFO order). I need this to be FIFO order. How to achieve that? Regards, Rekha On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 8:31 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > If you

Hi, I am following this post * http://www.sitepoint.com/ruby-social-gems-linkedin/* for using linked gem and API for getting profile and other stuff But at the end I am getting this error: => Booting WEBrick => Rails 3.2.13 application starting in development on http://0.0.0.0:3000 => Call with -d to detach => Ctrl-C to shutdown server Exiting

Hi, I plan to implement an algorithm which requires BasicBlocks to have at most two predecessors. simplifycfg pass is not a choice since it doesn't do what I want, going by its description. Could someone point me to an existing pass which does this job? Thanks, -- Rekha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: > Thank you David for prompt reply. > > I tried with SmallVector. I inserted elements with push_back(). > But when I retrieve elements using pop_back_val the elements are returned > in reverse order of insertion (I mean like LIFO order). > I need this to be FIFO order. How to achieve that? >

Hi, I am writing an analysis which requires creating worklist of basic blocks. The worklist should be in FIFO order. I checked SmallVector (and similar others) and found out this is working in LIFO order when I use the functions push_back and pop_back_val to insert and delete elements in the worklist. Can someone suggest an appropriate DS to implement my worklist. Note: I am not concerned about

Hi, Would like to know the parsing strategy used in LLVM - top-down, bottom-up, or any other? -- Rekha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130926/329f7027/attachment.html>

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On > Behalf Of "C. Bergström" > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:39 AM > To: Rekha R > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] on compiling FORTRAN programs > > On 07/15/14 09:29 PM, Rekha R wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: > Ok. Got it. > > If *add nsw* overflows, this results in undefined value. > But then *add* on same arguments results in well-defined value. > > Hence treating first one as redundant based on the second is acceptable. > But vice versa is not. > If they are in different code paths, sure.

Hi, Thank you for all your helpful comments. To sum up, below is the list of correct folding examples for fadd: (1) fadd %x, -0.0 -> %x (2) fadd undef, undef -> undef (3) fadd %x, undef -> NaN (undef is a NaN which is propagated) Looking through the code I found the "NoNaNs" flag accessed through an instance of

Hi Duncan, On 17.09.2014 21:10, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Oleg, > > On 17/09/14 18:45, Oleg Ranevskyy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Thank you for all your helpful comments. >> >> To sum up, below is the list of correct folding examples for fadd: >> (1) fadd %x, -0.0 -> %x >> (2) fadd undef, undef -> undef

Hi Oleg, On 01/09/14 18:46, Oleg Ranevskyy wrote: > Hi Duncan, > > I looked through the IEEE standard and here is what I found: > > *6.2 Operations with NaNs* > /"For an operation with quiet NaN inputs, other than maximum and minimum > operations, if a floating-point result is to be delivered the result shall be a > quiet NaN which should be one of the input

Hi, I was trying to write a sample optimization pass in LLVM, by following instructions in LLVM doc for Writing a New Pass. But then ran into *make*issues. The issue is with having separate *source *and *build* directories. The LLVM doc for 'Getting Started' suggests keeping the two separate, but the 'Writing a new pass' doc assumes they are merged. Hence the *make *issue. I did

As far as I know, LLVM does not try very hard to guarantee constant folded NaN payloads that match exactly what the target would generate. —Owen > On Sep 16, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Oleg Ranevskyy <llvm.mail.list at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Duncan, > > I reread everything we've discussed so far and would like to pay closer attention to the the ARM's FPSCR register

hallo list, I have recently started to learn shell scripting. Now i am trying to write a script to backup /etc and /var to my home dir in a separate folder and then backup the home dir to usb drive using rsync. My goal is when i will run the script it will output status to standard output in form of bold messages with time and simultaneously logs to another file in /root

IMHO; On undefined behaviour we can do whatever we want. If the "add nsw" overflows this would lead to undefined behaviour. Therefore we can assume that "add", with the same arguments will not overflow. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > On 23 July 2014 06:25, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: >

On 09/26/2013 10:51 AM, Rekha R wrote: > Hi, > > Would like to know the parsing strategy used in LLVM - top-down, > bottom-up, or any other? > > -- > Rekha > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > Do

If you don't care about efficiency you can push (or at least insert) at the front of a(small or otherwise) vector. On Nov 3, 2013 3:32 AM, "Rekha R" <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: > Hi, > > I am writing an analysis which requires creating worklist of basic blocks. > The worklist should be in FIFO order. I checked SmallVector (and similar > others) and found

Hi, Thank you David. My question was from a machine independent code analyzer/optimizer perspective where types are of less importance. Hence I felt difficult to understand the IR with the types. Rekha On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:44 PM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk > wrote: > On 27 Oct 2014, at 12:46, Rekha R <rekharamapai at nitc.ac.in> wrote: > > > Why