similar to: Repeated application of optimization passes

Andy and I briefly discussed this the other day, we have not yet got chance to list a detailed pass order for the pre- and post- IPO scalar optimizations. This is wish-list in our mind: pre-IPO: based on the ordering he propose, get rid of the inlining (or just inline tiny func), get rid of all loop xforms... post-IPO: get rid of inlining, or maybe we still need it, only

I'm working on a whole program optimizer that uses LLVM as a library, and one of the things I want to do is eliminate dead global functions and variables even when they are not local to a module. (This understandably doesn't happen by default because the optimizer has to assume it could be compiling a library rather than a program.) I've actually written a function to do this, but

Hi, I would like to run the -O1 pass sequence followed by -reg2mem from an out of tree project which uses llvm. I am using the following code snippet to do so but in some cases, my method is also vectorising the code, which doesn't happen when running the same sequence(-S -O1 -reg2mem) through opt. Can someone please help me find what I am missing? Thanks, Akash. *

Hi, This is Ariel from the Rust team again. I am having another pass ordering issue. Looking at the pass manager at https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/7034870f30320d6fbc74effff539d946018cd00a/lib/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp (the early SimplifyCfg now doesn't sink stores anymore! I can't wait until I can get to use that in rustc!) I find that the loop optimization group

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

Okay, as far as I can see looking through the output of that, the empty block isn't created near the end, it exists at the start and never goes away. On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Hi Russell, > > Can you run your IR though opt with -O3 and -print-after-all and see when > the block becomes empty?

Hello folks, I wrote a transforming looppass for my project, opt --help can see it. I want clang to use my pass too, so that I don't have to compile to IR, opt, and then llc to binary manually. Now I am trying to add my pass to O2 by mimicking LICM pass. I add a line "MPM.add(createMyPass());" in PassManagerBuilder::populateModulePassManager, and got assertion fail "void

On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 12:12:34AM -0500, John Criswell wrote: > On 3/2/15 12:07 AM, Haopeng Liu wrote: > >Got it, thanks. But in my pass, I use function name to locate. Can I > >disable mangling in clang? > > No, but you can probably fine a library that can either mangle the original > name or demangle the name you're seeing in the LLVM bitcode. > > As an FYI,

Simplifycfg doesn't get run by default even with -O3, but 'opt -simplifycfg' can do it. I'm looking to add this functionality to an optimizer program that uses the llvm libraries. What's the best way to do this? I don't really mind whether it becomes available as a command line option as in opt, or I need to hardcode it as always on. To make it available as a command line

Yes, that is what I was thinking. Should I report it as a bug? On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Russell Wallace" <russell.wallace at gmail.com> > > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >

Revision 190916 Commit message: "Lift alignment restrictions for load/store folding on VINSERTF128/VEXTRACTF128. Fixes PR17268." Actual contents of the commit includes Index: tools/opt/opt.cpp =================================================================== --- tools/opt/opt.cpp (revision 190915) +++ tools/opt/opt.cpp (revision 190916) @@ -462,6 +462,7 @@

Tobias, et al., Attached is the my autovectorization pass. I've fixed a bug that appears when using -bb-vectorize-aligned-only, fixed some 80-col violations, etc., and at least on x86_64, all test cases pass except for a few; and all of these failures look like instruction-selection bugs. For example: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV - fails to compile shared_sha256.c with an error: error in

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

> >> You can look at AddOptimizationPasses() in opt.cpp. > > > > As far as I understand, the two passmanager do not interleave their > > passes. It first runs all the function passes and below. Then all the > > module passes. So if you specify: > > > > opt -mymodulepass0 -myfunctionpass -mymodulepass1 > > > > What you actually get is:

Tobias, I've attached the latest version of my autovectorization patch. I was able to add support for using the ScalarEvolution analysis for load/store pairing (thanks for your help!). This led to a modest performance increase and a modest compile-time increase. This version also has a cutoff as you suggested (although the default value is set high (4000 instructions between pairs) because

On 11/17/2011 12:38 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > Tobias, et al., > > Attached is the my autovectorization pass. Very nice. Will you be at the developer summit? Maybe we could discuss the integration there? Here a first review of the source code. > diff --git a/docs/Passes.html b/docs/Passes.html > index 5c42f3f..076effa 100644 > --- a/docs/Passes.html > +++ b/docs/Passes.html

Hi everyone! First time poster here. Apologies if I am breaking some rules and please let me know so I will not break it again! I am a summer research student at the Computer Science Department at the University of Toronto and I am working on benchmarking LLVM optimizations. I tried looking for it online but was not able to find a programmatic way to toggle specific LLVM optimizations. For

Hi, If hope this is the right list to post a question like this. If not, my apologies -- please redirect me. Following the Kaledoscope example I am trying to write a simple JIT and compile my own small language using LLVM. Compilation happens using the C++ api by constructing a VM and emitting code using the api (just as the Kaledoscope example). The code in this setup will be optimized

Hi folks, I am wondering about the relationship clang, opt and llc. I understand that this has been asked, e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40350990/relationship-between-clang-opt-llc-and-llvm-linker. Sorry for posting a similar question again, but I still have something that hasn't been resolved yet. More specifically I am wondering about the following two approaches compiling

Hi, I have a module pass and I hope to use it to optimize a real-world program. I need LTO，and I have got LTO plugin. But How can I add my passes to LTO Pass. I can't find solution. What should I do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200422/76d2b046/attachment.html>