similar to: [LLVMdev] BlockFrequencyImpl asserts on multiple edges between same MBBs with different weights in LLVM 3.2

On Jan 23, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Stefan Hepp <stefan at stefant.org> wrote: > However, an alternative option could be to simply disallow different edge weights for edges with the same source and destination, or to make the call to getEdgeFreq(Pred,BB) in BlockFrequencyImpl distinguish between the edges, which would eliminate the need for an additional PtrSet, but is not that easy to

Hi, On 01/23/2013 11:30 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > If you can find the place that creates the duplicate MBB edge, that would be great. > Found it :) It happens in lib/CodeGen/IfConversion.cpp at the very end in MergeBlocks. I attached a small patch that should resolve that issue. Our tests now compile sucessfully even without my previous patch. regards, Stefan --------------

On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: >> This is still *very* much a rough draft, but it's probably better to review that the previous patch. One big caveat, I know I have an iteration bug in here somewhere that is inf-looping. Just ran out of steam debugging it, will pick it back up again later today to shake it out. > > Some random notes: > > - Please

Hi, I'm trying to write up my little m68k backend things have been going smoothly. I've been working with the x86 backend as a template, fixing things as I go. Now I've run into branches and I have a crash I don't really understand. Here's the sample IR I'm running llc on to generate assembly: define i32 @ilog2(i32 %x) { entry: %tmp718 = icmp eq i32 %x, 0

Thanks for all of the comments Andy and Jakob. A new patch is attached that is *much* less of a rough draft. Sorry for any confusion due to the early state of the patch. Also, many many thanks to Jakob for his explanation of how the branches between MBBs should be handled, and Andy, Jim, and Eric who helped answer my questions on IRC when I ran into stumbling blocks. Also, Nick, who shoulder

Hi, Two questions. 1) How are you computing size of the method being jitted? 2) Why not simply add the functionality of allocating emission buffer of specific size to MachineCodeEmitter instead? Thanks, Evan On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi everyone, > > vmkit requires to know the size of a jitted method before emitting > the method. This allows to

On Apr 7, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi Evan, > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> >> I don't think the duplication is going to be top much of a problem. >> If >> it is, I'll bug you about refactoring. :) >> >> > > I don't mean to show how lazy I can be, but I also need to know the > size > of the exception table

Hi: This is my first patch submission. Hopefully, this is the proper the protocol. Attached is a patch for the llc ARM backend: Added mechanism to generate switch table in a data section rather than having it interleaved with the code. This is controlled by command line flags and off by default. Also, tried to document and improve the code where I modified it. Robert -------------- next part

On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:50 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Ok, wow that wasn't hard at all. Awesome ;-) > This is still *very* much a rough draft, but it's probably better to review that the previous patch. One big caveat, I know I have an iteration bug in here somewhere that is inf-looping. Just ran out of steam debugging it, will pick it back up again later today to shake it out.

On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi Evan, > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> 1) How are you computing size of the method being >> jitted? > > I add a new pass with addSimpleCodeEmitter, with the emitter being a > SizeEmitter. Since the target calls the emitter with functions such as > writeByte, writeWord, etc.... the SizeEmitter class implements these

On Apr 4, 2008, at 11:16 PM, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> >> Let's see. ARM has it already. PPC has getNumBytesForInstruction so >> you only need to add one to compute function size. Also you only need >> to implement it for targets that support JIT right now, which leaves >> Alpha and X86. I'm

On Apr 4, 2008, at 5:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: >> >> >> That's a hack. :-) > > It is if you think that code emitter should only be used for actually > writing somewhere the data. It is not if you find it another useful > utility ;-) Except it's pretty slow at it. :-)

Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > > I don't think the duplication is going to be top much of a problem. If > it is, I'll bug you about refactoring. :) > > I don't mean to show how lazy I can be, but I also need to know the size of the exception table emitted in memory (JITDwarfEmitter.cpp). Reviewing it a little, I can not see how things won't be duplicated.

Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > 1) How are you computing size of the method being > jitted? I add a new pass with addSimpleCodeEmitter, with the emitter being a SizeEmitter. Since the target calls the emitter with functions such as writeByte, writeWord, etc.... the SizeEmitter class implements these function by incrementing a counter. At the end of the pass, the code size of the

Sorry about the tardiness of my reply. My mail client has playing tricks with me. :-) I am assuming the issue has nothing to do the branch to jumptable instructions but rather the MachineJumpTableInfo associated with every MachineFunction? If so, please take a look at BranchFoldiing.cpp for an example. Evan On Aug 10, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > >

Hi, In the LiveIntervalAnalysis::runOnMachineFunction, there is a code to compute the MBB2IdxMap, by remembering for each MBB its start and end instruction numbers: unsigned MIIndex = 0; for (MachineFunction::iterator MBB = mf_->begin(), E = mf_->end(); MBB != E; ++MBB) { unsigned StartIdx = MIIndex; for (MachineBasicBlock::iterator I = MBB->begin(), E =

Evan: Sorry for the late follow up, I was out of town last week. Enclosed please find the updated patch including all your suggestions and a dejagnus test. Robert On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2009, at 2:42 PM, robert muth wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>

Evan Cheng wrote: > On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > > > That's a hack. :-) It is if you think that code emitter should only be used for actually writing somewhere the data. It is not if you find it another useful utility ;-) > Some targets already have ways to compute the exact > size of a function. See ARM::GetFunctionSize()

Hi I'm seeing something probably related to this. I'm getting an assert from the lower_bound in LiveIntervals::findLiveinMBBs (from a checking std:: VS2005 implementation). Idx2MBBMap has two elements in it, both of which have a .first of 0. (I believe because of an empty MBB in the function below, so StartIndex doesn't advance). scott On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 2:52 AM, Roman

Evan Cheng wrote: > > Let's see. ARM has it already. PPC has getNumBytesForInstruction so > you only need to add one to compute function size. Also you only need > to implement it for targets that support JIT right now, which leaves > Alpha and X86. I'm guessing Alpha is using fixed encoding so it should > be pretty easy. Or you can just punt it and let the target