similar to: [LAA] RtCheck on pointers of different address spaces.

Hi Stefanos, Attached the testcase. I tried to reduce it further, but the problem goes away when I remove the instructions further. There is a nested loop and the fault occurs while processing the inner loop (for.body) To reproduce the crash: opt -O3 testcase.ll -o out.ll > `groupChecks()` will only try to group pointers that are on the same alias set. If that’s true, the RT check

Hi Ashutosh, > On Mar 16, 2015, at 9:06 PM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > From: Adam Nemet [mailto:anemet at apple.com <mailto:anemet at apple.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10:48 AM > To: Nema, Ashutosh > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC: Loop

> On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:46 PM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> wrote: > > Thanks Adam for your reply. > > From: Adam Nemet [mailto:anemet at apple.com <mailto:anemet at apple.com>] > Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 3:23 AM > To: Nema, Ashutosh > Cc: Hal Finkel; Philip Reames; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Subject:

> On Mar 20, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> wrote: > > > Yes, this is what I was proposing above and here ;): > Thanks Adam it’s for confirming J NP :). > > > No, not hasLoopInvariantStore but hasAccessToLoopInvariantAddress. > Its only for invariant stores[not loads], Using ‘hasLoopInvariantStore’ (or a name with invariant store)

> On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:02 AM, Sean Silva via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com <mailto:chandlerc at gmail.com>> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:40 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com <mailto:chisophugis at gmail.com>> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13,

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:40 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > >> Interesting. I'm not sure this is the right metric, however. There are >> lots of analyses that hold pointers to other analyses but don't need to. >> The analysis handle itself can be reacquired

> On Mar 5, 2015, at 10:33 PM, Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> wrote: > > > I am about to post the patches to make LAA suitable for Loop Distribution. As you will hopefully find this will make the LAA more generic. I will cc you on the patches. > > Sure Adam. > > RuntimeCheckEmitter > “RuntimeCheckEmitter::addRuntimeCheck” > While creating

Hi LLVM community, I am writing a custom pass for analyzing the dependence information for the memory access within a loop. I found “LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis” class useful, however I m not able to obtain information from that pass. Here is what I did to get the information: // require pass virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const {

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "Xinliang David Li" <davidxl at google.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Davide Italiano" > <dccitaliano at gmail.com>, "Tim Amini Golling" >

Have you check `LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis::runOnFunction` ran as you expect? Besides, I am not sure if `LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis::runOnFunction` does anything useful, have you check that, too? 2018-02-08 1:49 GMT+08:00 Kewen Meng via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > Hi LLVM community, > > I am writing a custom pass for analyzing the dependence information for > the

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:13 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote: > > > > On 03/20/2016 05:38 AM, Aries Gunawan via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I am very interested in contributing to LLVM project in this year’s GSoC. I am new with LLVM, but this is used in the compiler course in my

Hi Adam, On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Adam Nemet via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:13 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> > wrote: > > > > On 03/20/2016 05:38 AM, Aries Gunawan via llvm-dev wrote: > > > *Loop Dependence Analysis Infrastructure. *I have looked in the source > codes repo and I

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > Yea, this is a nasty problem. > > One important thing to understand is that this is specific to analyses > which hold references to other analyses. While this isn't unheard of, it > isn't as common as it could be. Still, definitely something we need to > address. > We can call

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Yea, this is a nasty problem. >>>

Hi Adam, I'm looking into your LLE pass in order to remove the RAR dependency from GVN, and I've hit a problem that might need some more thinking. I've modified your patch to cope with both kinds of dependencies in the ForwardingCandidate class, but the way the pass gathers informations only brings RAW dependencies: const auto *Deps = LAI.getDepChecker().getDependences(); if

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Yea, this is a nasty problem. >>> >>> One

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:25 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>

On 09/22/2017 12:03 AM, Mehdi AMINI wrote: > Hi Hal, > > > 2017-09-21 20:59 GMT-07:00 Hal Finkel via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>: > > > On 09/12/2017 10:26 PM, Gerolf Hoflehner wrote: >> >> >>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 10:47 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev >>> <llvm-dev at

Hi Hal, 2017-09-21 20:59 GMT-07:00 Hal Finkel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> : > > On 09/12/2017 10:26 PM, Gerolf Hoflehner wrote: > > > > On Sep 11, 2017, at 10:47 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On 09/11/2017 12:26 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: > > Hi Hal, Tobias, Michael and others, > *...* >

On 09/11/2017 12:26 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: > Hi Hal, Tobias, Michael and others, > >> On Sep 1, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> ** >> >> *Hi everyone,As you may know, stock LLVM does not provide the kind of >> advanced loop transformations