similar to: [LLVMdev] Removing AvailableExternal values in GlobalDCE (was Re: RFC: ThinLTO Impementation Plan)

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:41 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> >> wrote: >> > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:18 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:41 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Teresa Johnson

On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:20 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:18 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> >> - Marking of imported functions (for use

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> On 2015-Jun-03, at 09:56, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:18 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> On 2015-Jun-04, at 07:10, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith >> <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2015-Jun-03, at 09:56, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at

On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:18 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> - Marking of imported functions (for use in ThinLTO-specific symbol >> >> linking and global DCE, for example). >> > >> > Marking how? Do you mean giving them internal linkage, or something >> > else? >> >> Mentioned just after this: either

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> Agreed. Although I assume you mean invoke the new pass under a >> ThinLTO-only option so that avail extern are not dropped in the >> compile pass before the LTO link? > > > No, this pass

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > Personally, I think the right approach is to add a bool to > createGlobalDCEPass defaulting to true named something like > IsAfterInlining. In most standard pass pipelines, GlobalDCE runs after > inlining for obvious reasons, so the default makes sense. The special case > is

Talked to Eric Fri and he suggested that this might be the first of several places where we want behavior of LTO compiles to diverge from normal -O2 compiles. So for now I have implemented this such that we pass down -flto to the -cc1 job, and that gets propagated as a code gen option and into the PassManagerBuilder. I have left the current logic translating -flto to the -emit-llvm-bc option,

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > Since the compiler is always free to delete available_externally > functions, I think you could just add a pass to the -flto=thin pipeline > that deletes all of them (referenced or not) -- it's just a single loop > through all the functions deleting the bodies of those with the right

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > The clang patch lgtm, and I had some comments on the LLVM patch. Duncan, do > you want to say more there? > > --- include/llvm/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.h (revision 237590) > +++ include/llvm/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.h (working copy) > @@ -121,6 +121,7 @@ class PassManagerBuilder {

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> On 2015 Jun 4, at 16:51, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >> > Personally, I think the right approach is to add a bool to createGlobalDCEPass defaulting to

Hi Hal, Thanks for your hint! $ /opt/llvm-svn/bin/opt -S -internalize -internalize-public-api-list=main -globaldce hello3.ll -o hello3.dce.ll    it works :) But I argue that `main` Function should be inserted into ExternalNames by default: Index: lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp 

Hi LLVM developers, $ cat hello.c #include <stdio.h> void foo() { } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {   for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {     printf("%d\n", i);   }   return 0; } $ /opt/llvm-svn/bin/clang --version Fedora clang version 6.0.0 (trunk 316308) (based on LLVM 6.0.0svn) Target: x86_64-redhat-linux Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /opt/llvm-svn/bin $

On 13 Jan 2010, at 16:43, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Mark Muir wrote: >> - Run the existing Clang tool on each source file, using -emit-llvm to generate a .bc file for each module. >> - Run llvm-link to merge them into a single .bc file. >> - Run llc to generate a complete machine assembly. >> >> However, with optimisations enabled, the resulting code is not as

On 8 Jun 2015, at 21:08, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > I'd rather not have it be an llvm option at all. Just construct a different set of passes... > > This would also solve the problem of needing multiple sets of options to be passed to the builder. It'd be a bit of a change (i.e. having clang do the pass setup), but I think it'd be worth it

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Gabriel Quadros <gquadrossilva at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > >     I am trying to use your inline pass, and I would like to know if it is > possible to remove a function from the bitcode file once it is inlined. > Basically, I try: > > $> opt -inline file2.bc > file2.in.bc > >     and I see that all the functions

Jack Howarth wrote: > I've had better luck compiling all of pymol 1.1r2 with > -O4 on darwin9. Everythink links and there appears to be > no regressions in the resulting code. I take it that LTO > in llvm 2.5 is still limited to dead code elimination, > correct? No. libLTO does the equivalent to opt -internalize -ipsccp -globalopt -constmerge -deadargelim -instcombine

On 6 janv. 2011, at 19:00, llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: >> I'm using LLVM to JIT-compile the XL programming language. I've recently added a whole-program optimization phase that gives excellent results, but I noticed that the StripDeadPrototypesPass was removing all references to my runtime support functions. > > why is that a problem? Because I have pointers to

Hi Jeffrey, On Feb 26, 2010, at 16:02, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > [sidenote: Please try to avoid extraneous whitespace and line wrapping changes in your patches. It makes it harder to see what you're actually changing] Sorry just saw some preexisting code was not in 80 columns. > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi