similar to: List of optimizers

Thanks John. Does this solve the problem of analysis availability though? If I still have to run the function analyses manually, I might as well keep rolling with the CallGraphSCCPass. (I probably should have mentioned that this is what I’m using right now.) Félix > Le 2015-05-19 à 10:12:32, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> a écrit : > > On 5/18/15 10:45 PM, Félix Cloutier

So I got very mixed results. With the CallGraphSCCPass, both `addRequired<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>` and `addRequired<MemoryDependenceAnalysis>` fail at runtime. The LLVM core has just two CallGraphSCCPasses and neither uses neither analyses, so it's hard to find a valid example. I transformed the pass into a ModulePass, using scc_iterator as shown in CGPassManager to process

On 6/20/16 3:46 PM, Yuxi Chen wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for your reply. > But I still don't know how a transform pass updates a new analysis > pass after it modifies the IR. Can you explain it clearly? I am not > familiar with pass management and invocation. Passes can have methods that allow their internal state to be updated by other passes (the same way that their state

On 6/19/16 4:28 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > >> On Jun 18, 2016, at 10:44 PM, Yuxi Chen via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> When I use llvm, I encounter a problem like "unable to schedule pass >> A required by C" >> I investigated deeper.

So we come back to my earlier comment: can you produce a one-file, < 100 lines that reproduce the issue? -- Mehdi > On Mar 24, 2016, at 10:16 AM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > Those lines of code are in a function that is called before calling the moduleToObjectFile() function > > On Mar 24, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at

You may want to try adding this code (copy/pasted from llc.cpp): // Initialize targets first, so that --version shows registered targets. InitializeAllTargets(); InitializeAllTargetMCs(); InitializeAllAsmPrinters(); InitializeAllAsmParsers(); // Initialize codegen and IR passes used by llc so that the -print-after, // -print-before, and -stop-after options work. PassRegistry

I’m using LLVM 3.8.0, and no, it’s the precompiled version That’s why it doesn’t give me enough info for debug > On 24 Mar 2016, at 1:53 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > This code path is not likely to crash usually. Did you build LLVM yourself? Which version are you using and can you reduce the test case to be "minimal" so that someone can

On 5/6/15 10:19 AM, Kuperstein, Michael M wrote: > > Hello Cristiano, > > I don’t think doFinalization() is really meant to be used this way. > My understanding is that doInitialization() and doFinalization() are designed specifically for modifying the LLVM IR (otherwise, why would a mutable reference to the Function be provided)? If that is not the case, then there is either a

Passes all need to be initialized before they are added into a pass manager. Are you calling TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass::initializePass anywhere? -Chris > On Mar 24, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Lorenzo Laneve via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The problems happens because PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisPassInfo(AnalysisID AID) returns nullptr in

Those lines of code are in a function that is called before calling the moduleToObjectFile() function > On Mar 24, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > You may want to try adding this code (copy/pasted from llc.cpp): > > // Initialize targets first, so that --version shows registered targets. > InitializeAllTargets(); >

The problems happens because PMTopLevelManager::findAnalysisPassInfo(AnalysisID AID) returns nullptr in PMTopLevelManager::addImmutablePass(ImmutablePass *P). This because PassRegistry::getPassRegistry()->getPassInfo(AID) call in it returns nullptr as well. Should I probably register the pass I want to add with PassRegistry::registerPass(const PassInfo &PI, bool ShouldFree) ? I didn’t do it

Update: Sorry my bad. I built llvm and tried it with debugging version. It was an assertion (IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:764) saying that it expects all immutable passes to be initialized. > On Mar 24, 2016, at 2:00 AM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > I’m using LLVM 3.8.0, and no, it’s the precompiled version > That’s why it doesn’t give me enough info for

Sorry, that's a pure crash I think, assertions are not triggered. Xcode doesn’t map those 2 functions to line numbers because they’re in precompiled libraries On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:44 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Mar 23, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com <mailto:lore97drk at

Sir, I am interested in adding a new analysis or optimization pass and building the getting started guide as a project for gsoc. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 1:29 AM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/17/16 10:58 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > > No i have not worked previously on llvm. I have looked through the > projects but because of no prior experience i am

Sir, I am interested in add a new pass. I have read about analysis, transformation passes. Can you help me with some example ideas? On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:39 AM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/22/16 11:15 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > > Sir, > I am interested in adding a new analysis or optimization pass and building > the getting started guide as a

Hi Simon, > From: Simone Atzeni <simone.at at gmail.com> > To: John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Walking thru CallGraph bottom up > Message-ID: <318EBA41-2040-4EFE-B330-5813C817C2A2 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > I think I got it and the example is

John, thanks for your helpful advice. My ultimate goal is to construct a full instruction-level program dependence graph for a given IR file. The hard point is how to establish the correct data dependence edges when some function arguments are multi-level pointers. To solve this problem I hope to check the point-to level for each pointer variable. I think the data dependence through pointers can

Hi, John Criswell Thank you very much. I am installing LLVM-3.2, but I encounter the next error when carrying out "make": llvm[3]: Compiling ClangASTNodesEmitter.cpp for Release+Asserts build ClangASTNodesEmitter.cpp: In member function ‘std::pair<llvm::Record*, llvm::Record*><unnamed>::ClangASTNodesEmitter::EmitNode(const std::multimap<llvm::Record*, llvm::Record*,

On 5/6/15 11:15 AM, Kuperstein, Michael M wrote: > > I’ve always thought that the only guarantee is that > doFinalization(Module &M) runs after runOnFunction() was executed for > all functions in M, and there’s no guarantee it runs *immediately* after. > > That is, a PM may run a bunch of function passes over each function, > and only then call doFinazliation() for each

Dear Simon, Kevin is correct; as far as I can tell, there is no method of getting the functions calling a given function. Instead, you have to start at the main() function and search for the function using a depth-first or breadth-first search. What may make sense is to build a new data structure that has nodes that point from callees to callers once and then use that for your queries.