similar to: [LLVMdev] LTO regression test Bug 17623

Hi David, That's weird, I have setup LNT in multiple different distros and have never seen this. Looks like no one ever tested on the system you're running. Can you share a bit more of your environment? Also, you can check the setup.py to see if it does any stripping of package names, which could go wrong in the wrong environment. cheers, --renato On 29 January 2015 at 20:13, David

I followed the lnt quickstart <http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/quickstart.html> directions but got this diagnostic when doing the setup: bash-3.2$ ~/mysandbox/bin/python ~/lnt/setup.py develop /Users/dcallahan/mysandbox/lib/python2.7/site-packages/setuptools/dist.py:284: UserWarning: The version spec\ ified requires normalization, consider using '0.4.1.dev0' instead of

Hi, I am new to the LLVM dev community so forgive a perhaps obvious question. I am looking at bug 17623 which is an LTO/optimizer interaction bug. I am working on a Mac with Xcode installed but have also built the 3.6 LLVM binaries (from a few month old local branch). The default version of “ld” from Apple supports an option “-save-temps” which I believe saves bitcode both before and after the

On Jan 3, 2015, at 11:52 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 2, 2015, at 8:32 PM, David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am new to the LLVM dev community so forgive a perhaps obvious question. I am looking at bug 17623 which is an LTO/optimizer interaction bug. I am working on a Mac with Xcode installed but have

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

Thanks a lot Saleem, The issue is fixed and a simple app works fine now. -Daman On 08/06/14 12:57 pm, "Nick Lewycky" <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: >Damanjit Singh wrote: >> Thanks Saleem, Nick. >> >> I will try with the latest code and share the results. >> >> Though, just curious if I need to really use clang to generate the >> object file

Hi Saleem, Though a simple app works great I am facing few issues trying to link a slightly complex object file, generated via LLVM, with some libs generated via Visual Studio - 1. Seems IMAGE_SCN_MEM_16BIT is only written for the the first header in the COFF file, thus functions in other headers (if you are using function sections) don’t work. I was able to workaround this by forcing this entry

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Damanjit Singh <dsingh at adobe.com> wrote: > >> Hi Saleem, >> >> Though a simple app works great I am facing few issues trying to link a >> slightly complex object file, generated via LLVM, with some libs generated >> via

Hi, Is there support available in llc to convert llvm bytecode to Windows Mobile binary? I have tried triples like arm-pc-win32 , thumbv7-window ... but the object file generated is not getting linked to the windows native project. Any pointers will be greatly appreciated? Thanks, ~rajat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I am talking about Windows Mobile 8 and 8.1 and not CE. Not sure though that the Windows 8 (ARM NT) is similar to Windows Mobile 8 platform. I used the following command to generate the obj file Llc.exe -mtriple=thumbv7-windows -filetype=obj <some_name>.bc The object file generated in the above object doesn't get linked when I try to link it with the windows mobile library as it

Hi Saleem, I have a similar situation - I'd appreciate your inputs on it. I noticed that the obj file generated using llvm does not contain "thumb" instructions. I suspect that is what is causing runtime crash for me. Here's what I've tried - Start with a.c (on my linux machine where I have llvm/clang built as of yesterday) int add(int i, int j) {int k

Thank you so much Saleem, The target is Windows phone 8.1 (ARM). I'll update the crash details tomorrow. One big problem is that I have to use a physical windows phone for execution. I wonder if it is possible to execute such "exes" using qemu. Regards, Kashyap On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at

I'm using Windows 8.1, and every time I run check-clang, I eventually end up with a bunch of hung processes. Generally this is an instance of clang.exe, a bunch of instances of FileCheck.exe, and occasionally an llc.exe and an opt.exe. Inside, the processes are all hung inside of calls to WriteFile() attempting to write to stdout. I notice some of the tests fail with output indicating that

I had assumed you would treat phi nodes differently from other operations in that they don’t need to keep the block alive just to retain the data flow facts but it would be simplest to do that. Thanks Daniel From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org<mailto:dberlin at dberlin.org>> Date: Friday, January 29, 2016 at 10:26 PM To: David Callahan <dcallahan at

I think you can also avoid the RDF computation using a more directed form of control dependence testing such as described in Keshav Pingali and Gianfranco Bilardi. 1997. Optimal control dependence computation and the Roman chariots problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19, 3 (May 1997), 462-491. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256167.256217 However one challenge seems to be fixing the SSA graph

Thanks for the response. To clarify in your suggestion, llvm-link will combine the modules but not run the optimization pass, that is still delayed until the final binary is built, correct? My use case is apply LTO to roughly program subsets; sacrificing effectiveness to avoid scaling problems and to allow the artifacts to be reused like archives and cached like .o’s. I need to trigger the

(and sys::cas_flag that STATISTIC uses is a uint32 ...) On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Okay, dumb question: > Are you really getting negative numbers in the second column? > > 526,766 -136 mem2reg # PHI nodes inserted > > http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/PromoteMemoryToRegister_8cpp_source.html >

In practice, APT is not faster to build than rdf. The df calculator we use is linear time and quite fast. Updating is also pretty trivial since it's only deletes of dead and unreachable code. So anything it reached can be replaced with undef in most cases. Cd-dce is not slower in GCC than dce On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 8:31 PM David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com> wrote: > I think you

Maybe I was too quick here. Does gcc record the incoming edge to a phi? If so, won’t those change when you delete blocks in a non-trivial manner? How are those updated? From: David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com<mailto:dcallahan at fb.com>> Date: Saturday, January 30, 2016 at 7:02 AM To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org<mailto:dberlin at dberlin.org>>, Hal Finkel

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"David Callahan via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *To: *"Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org>, "LLVM Dev Mailing list" < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Sent: *Thursday, January 28, 2016