similar to: Objects of MemoryLocation class are created for ‘llvm.memset.*‘ intrinsics

2015-12-11 23:44 GMT+05:00 Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>: > Hi Roman, > > The MemoryLocation objects are involved in findAliasSetForUnknownInst, but none are created there for the memset intrinsic. MemoryLocation objects are only involved for the regular memory accesses being compared to the unknown instruction. See AliasSet::aliasesUnknownInst in lib/Analysis/AliasSetTracker.cpp.

Thank you for the idea! Could you please explain it? If I’m not mistaken, you advise to insert the unknown insts of an every AS from AliasSetTracker::add(const AliasSetTracker &AST) into a smallptrset and consequently append it to merged alias sets from AliasSetTracker::findAliasSetForUnknownInst. I think that Philip proposed something similar to your approach in

Dear llvm contributors, Could you please advise me how to skip checks, which are performed in AliasSet::aliasesUnknownInst, of unknown instructions from different alias sets of an alias set tracker that is a parameter of ‘AliasSetTracker::add(const AliasSetTracker &AST)’? If this wasn’t available at the moment and someone could review me, I would try to implement it. A temporary patch can be

On 01/27/2016 07:53 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:27 AM, Roman Gareev <gareevroman at gmail.com > <mailto:gareevroman at gmail.com>> wrote: > > Thank you for the idea! Could you please explain it? > > > Which part are you having trouble with, so i know where to concetrate? > > If I’m not > mistaken, you advise

Hi all, There is a problem about how AliasSetTracker merging AliasSet's when meet UnknownInst. When adding new pointer it looks for existing AliasSet's aliased with new pointer. And merging them together. It is ok for pointers: if %A mayalias %B and %B mayalias %C then %A mayalias %C. But the same logic when adding callsite is wrong ( findAliasSetForUnknownInst). Callsite may be known

Hello All, I have met a case with restrict keyword and I have a question about it. Let's look at a simple example. char buf[4]; void test(char *restrict a, char *restrict b, int count) {   for (unsigned i = 0; i < count; i++) {     *a = *b;     a++;     b++;     buf[i] = i;   } } I think there are no aliasing among pointers such as 'a', 'b' and 'buf'

On 11/17/2017 02:01 AM, Hongbin Zheng wrote: > Do you mean a and b are noalias if: > > static int foo(int *a, int *b) { > return a[0] + b[0]; > } > > int bar(int *x) { > return foo(x+1, x); > } > > ? > > To me, because "AA.alias((x+1, MemoryLocation::UnknownSize), > (x, MemoryLocation::UnknownSize)) != NoAlias", so a and b are not noalias.

What are you querying the alias analysis on in the above example - between the load and store? How are you creating your MemoryLocation for those too? On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 6:03 AM Venkataramanan Kumar via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Can someone please clarify me on this? > > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 22:25, Venkataramanan Kumar < >

You might want to look more carefully at how you're constructing the MemoryLocation.   The first argument is a pointer, and the second argument is the number of bytes pointed to by that pointer (or MemoryLocation::UnknownSize if the number of bytes accessed isn't known). More generally, copy-pasting code you don't understand isn't a good idea. -Eli On 5/22/2018 4:02 PM, Dávid

Hi all, i hope to get the MemoryLocation for argument %1 in a CallInst like "call void @function(i32* %1)", and i found an interface "getForArgument()" which seems available for this. However, i don't know how to correcly fill the 3rd argument TargetLibraryInfo in my own code and can't find an example in google. Does anybody know how to do it? Or some other advice for

Dear LLVM contributors, I work on the "Improvement of vectorization process in Polly". At the moment I'm trying to implement tiling, interchanging and unrolling of specific loops based on the following algorithm for the analytical modeling [1]. It requires information about the following parameters of a target architecture: 1. Size of double-precision floating-point number. 2.

It works with MemoryLocation MemoryLocation::get(const CallInst *CI) { AAMDNodes AATags; CI->getAAMetadata(AATags); const auto &DL = CI->getModule()->getDataLayout(); return MemoryLocation(CI, DL.getTypeStoreSize(CI->getType()), AATags); } Is it fine? :) 2018-05-22 23:56 GMT+02:00 Dávid Bolvanský <david.bolvansky at gmail.com>: > Looks like there are many overloads

Hi, RFC Im adding 2 new functions to the AliasAnalysis interface: 1) ModRefSameBufferCheck: this function will receive 2 memoryLocation as parameters, and returns true if the parameters are modifying or refering the same buffer or same memory block, false otherwise. 2) getAddressesDistance: the function will recieve 2 memoryLocation, if they are mod/ref-ing the same buffer/memory block, the

Hi, This came up in https://reviews.llvm.org/D38569, and I'd like some input on what's the best way to get alias and mod-ref info without having two alias calls. A couple of ideas: (a) Extend the getModRefInfo interface (+getModRefBehavior, +gerArgModRefInfo) to return a pair {ModRefInfo, AliasResult}. The AliasResult can be optional based on an argument e.g.: struct MRI_AR {

Yeah, sorry for that. Better "It compiles ok (but maybe incorrect code)", not "It works" as I wrote. 2018-05-23 1:08 GMT+02:00 Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org>: > You might want to look more carefully at how you're constructing the > MemoryLocation. The first argument is a pointer, and the second argument > is the number of bytes pointed to by

On 11/17/2017 01:49 AM, Hongbin Zheng wrote: > Could you elaborate "Note that, without further analysis of the uses > of the potentially-noalias pointers, you can do this only ..."? > Why the uses, instead of the def, of pointer matter? Both matter. static int foo(int *a, int *b) { return a[0] + b[1]; } int bar(int *x) { return foo(x+1, x); } You can't mark a and

IR: define i32 @calloc_strlen_write_between() { %call = tail call noalias i8* @calloc(i32 10, i32 1) store i8 97, i8* %call, align 1 %call1 = tail call i32 @strlen(i8* %call) ret i32 %call1 } static bool eliminateStrlen(CallInst *CI, BasicBlock::iterator &BBI, AliasAnalysis *AA, MemoryDependenceResults *MD, const DataLayout &DL, const TargetLibraryInfo *TLI,

On 07/14/2017 03:00 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Nuno Lopes via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I going through the alias analysis documentation >> (http://llvm.org/docs/AliasAnalysis.html) and noticed the following in the >> definition of PartialAlias: >> " >> The

Full stack trace: opt: /home/xbolva00/LLVM/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h:176: T* llvm::Optional<T>::getPointer() [with T = llvm::MemoryLocation]: Assertion `Storage.hasVal' failed. Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: opt aaa.ll -dse -S 1. Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module 'aaa.ll'. 2. Running pass 'Dead Store Elimination' on function

Hi, I wanted to give a heads-up that I've been looking into replacing the AliasSetTracker(AST) with MemorySSA in the Loop Invariant Code Motion (LICM) pass. I would love to get feedback on the best way to incrementally push in this change. Motivation: There has been an outstanding issue with using the Alias Set Tracker due to its expensive construction time (quadratic). We've had test