similar to: [LLVMdev] Program order in inst_iterator?

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:50 AM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: > It will iterate over the instructions in the order that they are stored in > the module/function/basicblock that they belong to. And that SHOULD, > assuming llvm-dis does what it is expected to do, be the same order. > Thanks for the reply. What about instruction ordering across basic blocks?

On 6/16/15 1:09 AM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Anirudh Sivaraman wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:50 AM, mats >> petersson<mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: >>> It will iterate over the instructions in the order that they are >>> stored in >>> the module/function/basicblock that they belong to. And that SHOULD, >>> assuming llvm-dis does

On 6/29/15 5:16 AM, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > Hi Anirudh, > > 'x' has a control dependency on 'y' because the value assigned to 'x' > depends on a path selected. This dependency can be converted into a data > dependency by means of a 'select' instruction because the control flow is > simple. Just an FYI, there is an optimization called

On Jun 29, 2015 3:16 AM, "Evgeny Astigeevich" <evgeny.astigeevich at arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Anirudh, > > 'x' has a control dependency on 'y' because the value assigned to 'x' > depends on a path selected. This dependency can be converted into a data > dependency by means of a 'select' instruction because the control flow is >

I am trying to implement if-conversion as an LLVM pass. My reference is Chapter 7 of the book ""Optimizing Compilers for Modern Architectures", based on the suggestion here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/llvm-dev/FlDGnqSGbR8/eH5hO9IBbXYJ Some steps in the if-conversion pass require simplification of Boolean Expressions. Is this doable within the LLVM API? llvm::ConstantExpr seems

I am trying to infer data dependencies using LLVM's def-use chains and I am having trouble dealing with 'phi' instructions. Specifically, If I am given the code snippet: int foo() { int y = 1; int x; if (y) { x = 2; } else { x = 3; } return x; } Here, x has a data dependence on y (not control because x is assigned in both halves), but LLVM expresses 'x'

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Evgeny Astigeevich <Evgeny.Astigeevich at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Anirudh, > > > > I hope these lecture slides about SSA and the dominance frontier will help > you with SSA and control flow analysis: > > > > http://www.seas.harvard.edu/courses/cs252/2011sp/slides/Lec04-SSA.pdf > > > > Unfortunately a use of

Hello I am anirudh, I need help to write script to fetch detail like ips, speedlimit from mysql and add htb rules at the starting of the server. it is for a small isp i am working for. can any one help me out!, i had tried but fail to limit speed -- Anirudh Chowdary _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

Hi! I am dealing with random forest using R. Is there a way to sample a fixed no.of rows from a dataset for use with different trees in random Forest. To be more clear, my data set contains 1500 rows, and I am growing 500 trees in Random Forest Is it possible to sample only 500 rows of data from the data set and use it for different trees in the forest. I mean each tree of the forest should use

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > and since result of *it is considered to be rvalue it can't be accepted > > by this operator. The complete discussion is in > > > > http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1385.htm > > > > I'd suggest to apply the following patch which makes operator* return >

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Yea, I've noticed that. However, it looks like inst_iterator is iterator over > pointers. Oh, wait a minite, that's the current code: > > inline IIty operator*() const { return BI; } > inline IIty operator->() const { return operator*(); } > > So operator* works as if value_type is Instruction*, but operator->

Hello, I think there's a rather subtle problem with the inst_iterator. It declares its iterator category as std::bidirectional_iterator_tag but C++ standard requirements for forward iterator (which are included in requirements for bidirection iterator), say that the type of expression *r; should be T&, where 'r' is the iterator and T is its value type. The inst_iterator,

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > and since result of *it is considered to be rvalue it can't be accepted by > this operator. The complete discussion is in > > http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1385.htm > > I'd suggest to apply the following patch which makes operator* return > reference to pointer. It makes my code compile and the rest

Chris Lattner wrote: > > inline IIty operator*() const { return BI; } > > inline IIty operator->() const { return operator*(); } > > > > So operator* works as if value_type is Instruction*, but operator-> works > > as if value_type is Instruction. Hmm ;-) > > Yeah, fishy huh? :) Yea, a bit. I've decided that before changing that I'd better

Hi, Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Gurunath Kadam via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Date: 11/27/2016 7:49 PM (GMT-06:00) To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: [llvm-dev] LLVM Pass for Instructions in Function (error Hi, Please find the embedded code. Also you may follow

Hi all! The randomForest in R enables us to prune the trees using the nodesize feature where we can stop splitting a node if it contains less than the specified no.of of records/entities at that node. However is there a way to stop the tree growing after a specified number of levels. To be more clear on what I mean by a level. Level 0 is the parent node, Level 1 has 2 daughter nodes, Level 2 has

Folks, I have a dataframe (snippet shown below). > demo.df[1:10, 1:6] dirn county year exp exp.wave r3 1 43901 Cuyahoga 2006 0 0 56 2 49098 Pickaway 2006 0 0 77 3 44164 Portage 2006 0 0 85 4 44610 Wayne 2006 1 1 76 5 45120 Wayne 2006 0 0 82 6 49593 Scioto 2006 1 1 89 7 46516 Crawford 2006 0 0

> On Nov 27, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Gurunath Kadam via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Sandeep, > > Thanks. > > One question about: > > Value* AddrPointer = Inst->getIperand(0); > > So this works for LVALUE(S) i.e. in my case pointer on LHS of '='. I cannot find anything online about getloperand online. > > For reference

I am looping through all instructions in a Function and depending on what I found I may or may not insert code. Despite the fact that I'm only actually inserting *before* instruction I have a infinite loop when I do something like below. For awhile it was simple enough to just increment i enough times but now I need something better. for(inst_iterator i = inst_begin(F); i != inst_end(F); ++i)

Hi, I've got a question regarding the restructering of a data set. What I have are municipality zip-codes and the names of 5'000 built-up areas within municipalities. The following example shows, what I would like to do: Input (Zip-Codes and Names): # CODE NAME #1 3 aaa #2 3 aab #3 3 aac #4 4 bba #5 4 bbb #6 4