similar to: Spilling Virtual Registers

Hello to all LLVM Developers. Given a object from a LiveInterval class, is there any way to know if this Live Interval is part or is inside a loop? Att -- Natanael Ramos Membro do corpo discente de Ciência da Computação pelo Instituto Federal de Minas Gerais - Campus Formiga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I'm working on my project for completion undergraduate courses, consisting of an experimental analysis of registers allocation algorithms. For this task, I am using the set of tools from the LLVM project. However, I have read the documentation of the LLVM project and not yet found a way to put the pieces of the puzzle together. So far I know: - As passes work as engage them to LLVM and

Thanks Matthias I can also use the method intervalIsInOneMBB() from LiveIntervals class to relate a LiveInterval to a MachineBasicBlock, right? Em 04/09/2015 2:26 PM, "Matthias Braun" <mbraun at apple.com> escreveu: > There is no direct support for this, but you can use > LiveIntervalAnalysis::getMBBStartIndex()/getMBBEndIndex()/getMBBFromIndex() > to relate the

Hello to all LLVM Developers. The LLVM IR is in strict SSA form (i.e. every variable is defined before it is used along every path from the entry to exit point)? According to the documentation, currently the LLVM IR is in the SSA form, but I don't see additional information about *strict* SSA form. The strict SSA form provide opportunities of optimization in register allocation, because is

Good Afternoon. I am a Computer Science undergraduate student in Brazil and as completion of course work, I am developing an register allocator, using the infrastructure of the LLVM. To accomplish this task, I have based my implementation in allocators already implemented in LLVM. But a question came to me while I was researching in books and articles of compiler theory and own documentation of

Ok, just to clarify, RegUnits, as far I understand, are Physical registers or alias to Physical registers. They exist because some instructions use physical registers directly rather than virtual register. It's right? And why this RegUnits should be present in the Interference Graph? I thought were only the Live Intervals would be the nodes of the graph. Sorry about the trouble to

Good Night. I'm implementing a Interference Graph in the Register Allocation pass. I'm building this graph BEFORE any assignment of a virtual register to physical register. But I have a doubt about how to check the interference between two Live Intervals (i.e. They live at same point), should I use: L1->overlaps(L2) Where L1 and L2 are two different Live Intervals. Or should I use:

Hi, I would like to ask about PBQPs use of InlineSpiller. The code output when using PBQP gets a lot bigger compared to when using RegAllocGreedy. PBQP does not split the live intervals, and a lot more (often redundant) reload instructions are emitted as a result, it seems. I wonder why this is, and if there are any plans to improve on this point? /Jonas Paulsson -------------- next part

Actually I am trying to run SPEC2006 through the Makefiles provided with LLVM Test Suite, so I think it should work properly... On 18 February 2013 15:49, Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux.vnet.ibm.com>wrote: > I can't really tell what is happening based on this output, but 'make' is > not the right way > to build SPECcpu2006 components. You need to do either by

Dear LLVMers, I am implementing a Function Pass and I would like to use analysis obtained from a Module Pass. Some extracts of my code look like that: struct MyPass : public FunctionPass { static char ID; MyPass() : FunctionPass(ID) { PADriver &PD = getAnalysis<AModulePass>(); ... virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const{

Dear LLVMers, I am having trouble to run SPEC2006. I have checked in my log file that the spec root has been correctly found with ./configure, but when I try: make TEST=simple in the External folder I get the following error: make -C /home/izabela/svn_llvm/llvm/projects/test-suite/tools all \ ORIGINAL_CC="clang" \ ORIGINAL_CXX="clang" make[1]: Entering directory

I'm trying to compute and print a weighted spill cost based upon the execution frequency of the basic block where the spill is inserted. My goal is to analyse what effect scheduling changes have on the sum of this weighted spill cost in some benchmarks. I've experimented doing this directly before a spill is inserted in InlineSpiller.cpp using MBFI.getBlockFreq()

I can't really tell what is happening based on this output, but 'make' is not the right way to build SPECcpu2006 components. You need to do either by using the supplied 'runspec' command with '-build' action directive or to issue the 'specmake' (which is a make adjusted by spec.org) on the build component folder. I can build 433.milc on PPC64 with clang without

Hi, I have worked a little on the PBQP register allocator, and it is quite clear (at least to me) that it is not even a serious alternative to RegAllocGreedy at the moment, due to the poor handling of spilling. As Arnaud wrote below, it is not optimizing spilling at all, but rather just spills anything that does not get an assignment. The result is a lot more spill/reload instructions than

Hi Quentin, Thanks for the reply! However, we are not using any profiling-based compilation in our current work. We are assuming that, if PGO is disabled, the register allocator (and any other pass that needs basic block frequency info) will be basing its decisions on some kind of *static" basic block frequency info that are based on some compile-time heuristics and at least capture loop

So I've been designing an experimental 6502 backend for LLVM. Link: <https://github.com/beholdnec/llvm-m6502> The 6502 only has a few registers, one accumulator and two indexes, none of which are large enough to hold an absolute pointer. Because of this, the backend really tests the power of LLVM's register allocator (RA). I've made a change to the RA that might be of interest

Ok, thanks. Except the question was meant slightly different. Less w.r.t. organizing the register classes, and more w.r.t. implementation. I've noticed for instance that when trying to model this straight forwardly by writing a vreg from spills and reading this from fills (not further elaborated here), that the spiller can't handle vreg def-use pairs: there are assertions making sure a

Hi Ryan, > On Mar 14, 2016, at 7:49 AM, Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I looked at this again and it appears that while spillAroundUses sets the register as 'dead', there is no checking to see if it's dead in subsequent iterations of the bundle loop. > > Is this intentional? > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Ryan

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=721 Summary: iptables-1.4.11 does not accpet raw udp ports Product: iptables Version: unspecified Platform: i386 OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: iptables AssignedTo: netfilter-buglog at lists.netfilter.org

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 Bug ID: 90348 Summary: Spilling failure of b96 merged value Product: Mesa Version: git Hardware: Other OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Drivers/DRI/nouveau Assignee: nouveau at