similar to: [LLVMdev] MemoryDependenceAnalysis reports dependencies between NoAlias pointers

Thanks Daniel, I'll do a debug build of LLVM (I guess that'll teach me) and step through it as soon as I'll find a power outlet. I'm calling getDependency on the load instruction, and it returns the store instruction. Suspiciously enough, calling invalidateCachedPointerInfo on load->getPointerOperand() does not cause my AA pass to be called again when I use getDependency (or

So I got very mixed results. With the CallGraphSCCPass, both `addRequired<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>` and `addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>` fail at runtime. The LLVM core has just two CallGraphSCCPasses and neither uses neither analyses, so it's hard to find a valid example. I transformed the pass into a ModulePass, using scc_iterator as shown in CGPassManager to process

Hi, I try to use MemoryDependenceAnalysis in a pass to analyse a simple function: void fct (int *restrict*restrict M, int *restrict*restrict L) { S1: M[1][1] = 1; S2: L[2][2] = 2; } When I iterate over MemoryDependenceAnalysis on the S2 statement, I get the load instruction for the first depth of the array, that’s ok. But I get also the load and store for the S1 statement. I assume the

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. >

I'm attaching the .bc file. Note that my analysis pass is invoked after "-O1" and that's why the IR I included in the original email is optimized. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: simple_loops_F2_4list.bc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 6384 bytes Desc: not available URL:

On Apr 13, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Anthony Danalis wrote: > I'm attaching the .bc file. Note that my analysis pass is invoked > after "-O1" and that's why the IR I included in the original email > is optimized. Hi Anthony, Sorry for the delay, things have been crazy lately. The MemDep API assumes that you will call getDependency() first, and then only call

Hi, I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary analyses. This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. The problem is, that I would like MemoryDependenceAnalysis to run on the unaltered module. I do not want to have dependencies to changed code. What is the cleanest way to do this? Sounds

On Aug 20, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: > Hi, > > I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass > requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary > analyses. > This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. > > The problem is, that I would like MemoryDependenceAnalysis to run on > the > unaltered

Hello, I fixed my patch as you asked. Sorry for the delay, I'd been working on my SSU patch (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-August/025347.html ) I hope that everything is fine now. -Jakub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pr2218-3.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 7511 bytes Desc: not available URL:

On Mar 20, 2009, at 8:13 AM, Amr Yehia wrote: > Dear all, > > I am having a problem adding a MemoryDependenceAnalysis pass to a > Module > Pass i created, it gives me the following error when i add > (Info.addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>();) it in the > getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &Info) function. > If MemoryDependenceAnalysis requires any module

Dear all, I am having a problem adding a MemoryDependenceAnalysis pass to a Module Pass i created, it gives me the following error when i add (Info.addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>();) it in the getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &Info) function. adding callgraph pass ... done opt: /net/home/yehia/llvm/llvm-2.4/include/llvm/Target/TargetData.h:114:

On Sep 2, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Jakub Staszak wrote: > Hello, > > I fixed my patch as you asked. Sorry for the delay, I'd been working > on my SSU patch (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-August/025347.html > ) > > I hope that everything is fine now. Hey Jakub, Thanks for working on this again, one more round :) Please merge the three testcases into one

Thanks John. Does this solve the problem of analysis availability though? If I still have to run the function analyses manually, I might as well keep rolling with the CallGraphSCCPass. (I probably should have mentioned that this is what I’m using right now.) Félix > Le 2015-05-19 à 10:12:32, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> a écrit : > > On 5/18/15 10:45 PM, Félix Cloutier

On Apr 25, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Anthony Danalis wrote: > >> I'm attaching the .bc file. Note that my analysis pass is invoked >> after "-O1" and that's why the IR I included in the original email >> is optimized. > > Hi Anthony, > > Sorry for the delay, things have been crazy lately. >

Chris Lattner schrieb: > > On Aug 20, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I do have a FunctionPass that does change the code. This FunctionPass >> requires another FunctionPass which performs all the necessary analyses. >> This AnalysisPass again requires MemoryDependenceAnalysis. >> >> The problem is, that I would like

Hey guys, I'd need to debug just-in-time compiled code under Mac OS. As predicted, GDB doesn't cope really well with it. The LLVM manual seems to say it's possible to patch GDB under Linux, but there seems to be no option for Mac OS. What can I do? I'd prefer a solution that integrates with Xcode, but I'll manage if it doesn't and I have to run the debugger externally.

Yes, I'm not arguing that there is a dependence, just that it's not a clobber dependence. The case of a load is already considered earlier in that function and with isLoad == false it returns MemDepResult::getDef(). My question is: why should a read-only call (which yields AliasAnalysis::Ref and is handled in this code fragment) be any different from e.g. a load. Isn't a read-only

Hello, I have a code similar to the following: program test integer i, j, N real B(10) call bar(N, 8) N = N+1 do i = 1, N B(i) = (i+5)/(i+3) enddo j = N/2 N = N+7 call IMPORTANT_F(B, N, i, j) end program and I am trying to use dependence

On Aug 21, 2009, at 3:04 AM, Marc Brünink wrote: >> This isn't really possible. The issue is that MemDep doesn't just >> "analyze your function". It is designed to be as lazy as possible, >> which means that it only does analysis when a query is performed. >> This >> means that if you have MemDep->Pass1->Pass2 and Pass2 uses MemDep

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>();