similar to: [GSOC] Potential Project Ideas

I'm looking for some opportunities to contribute to the LLVM core without too big of a learning curve. The open projects page<http://llvm.org/OpenProjects.html#misc_imp>suggests moving logic from the instruction combining transformation to the InstructionSimplify analysis. But it looks like some work has been done there since the projects page was last edited. Is there more benefit to

> On Sep 19, 2017, at 10:09 AM, Siddharth Shankar Swain <h2015096 at pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > Thanks for the suggestion i was trying to use the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691> and ASTimporter concept for cross file analysis. Can u explain in details the approach u suggested ? There is a tutorial on

I see. Is there a pre-existing way to do this in LLVM? Cheers, ~Siddharth. On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 at 02:12 Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > ConstantExprs are immutable, they can't be changed once they are created. > And a ConstantExpr can reference other ConstantExprs. So replacing all uses > of a Value in a ConstantExpr would require creating a new immutable

Yes running LLVM performance test suite with LTO and Thin LTO enabled. Thanks, Siddharth On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > I'm not completely sure what you are asking. Are you looking for > performance benchmarks to use for LTO and ThinLTO testing? Or are you > asking how to build/run with LTO and ThinLTO? Are you asking how to

Hi Chris, Thanks for answering, Can u clarify on this comment mentioned in https://github.com/Z3Prover/z3/issues/861 . cplusplus no exception support · Issue #861 · Z3Prover/z3 · GitHub - LLVM's *source code* does not use exceptions for performance reasons and so is compiled by default with -fno-exceptions. When using LLVM's libraries via it's C++ interface it is important

Hopefully someone else on the dev list who has experience with LNT and the LLVM test-suite will chime in. I've never run it myself. Adding Mehdi since he ran it with LTO/ThinLTO. I found some documentation for the test-suite: https://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#test-suite-overview http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/quickstart.html http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/tests.html#llvm-cmake-test-suite But I

There's some interest in my "auto-simplifier", which is nice :), so let me explain a bit about it. On 19/01/11 19:35, Sandeep Patel wrote: > You've mentioned your auto-simplifier a few times now and curiosity is > getting the better of me. Can you explain it a bit more? On 20/01/11 00:32, Nuno Lopes wrote: > Just out of curiosity, what's this auto-simplifier?

LLVM does not allow the use of exceptions in our code. We do not allow throwing or catching them. That does not mean you cannot compile the code with exceptions enabled, it just means we don't use them. Clang is a full C++ compiler. Even though LLVM & Clang do not use exceptions in their implementation, Clang does support compiling C++ code that uses exceptions. Does this answer your

I'm not completely sure what you are asking. Are you looking for performance benchmarks to use for LTO and ThinLTO testing? Or are you asking how to build/run with LTO and ThinLTO? Are you asking how to run LLVM's performance test-suite with LTO and ThinLTO? Teresa On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:21 AM Siddharth Shankar Swain < h2015096 at pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in> wrote: > Hi, >

Hi Chris, Thanks for the suggestion i was trying to use the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691 and ASTimporter concept for cross file analysis. Can u explain in details the approach u suggested ? What is `nm` on the object files ? Can u suggest some approach to start on this cross file analysis tool. Thanks, Siddharth On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com>

Hi Siddharth, alternativly you can try this <https://github.com/rizsotto/scan-build>, it's written in Python. Regards, Laszlo On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:14 AM Artem Dergachev via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I never tried it myself but i can try to help you with specific problems > that you're having if you disclose them. > >

Hi, Thanks for the info, If i only want to run performance test on benchmarks for LTO and Thin LTO enabled target, Can u suggest ways to do it ? I want to do it at my end. Thanks, Siddharth On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > I've only measured performance on x86. There are some old results for SPEC > cpu2006 in the blog post here:

yeah so when LTO runs, in the linker, it uses the target to produce object code. In the sense of code generation for target arch. Thanks, Siddharth On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:03 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > Can you be more specific? LTO/ThinLTO are target independent. You just > need to be using a linker that supports *LTO (gold, lld, ld64, eg). > Teresa

I'd be interested in attending and helping organise the Hyderabad meetup. Cheers Siddharth On Wed 30 May, 2018, 14:32 Siddharth Shankar Swain via llvm-dev, < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > We are a group of LLVM compiler developers in Hyderabad area. Considering > few previous mail about meetups in India, we are planning to organize LLVM > meetups

Siddharth, I'm not sure what coding standards you refer to when you say "some C++ coding standard". This question is answered in the LLVM Coding Standards document here: https://www.llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#do-not-use-rtti-or-exceptions <https://www.llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#do-not-use-rtti-or-exceptions> As such LLVM's coding standards prohibit the

+Aaron because i think he uses scan-build on Windows more or less successfully. I won't have time for setting up a Windows machine for myself in the nearest future. Could you tell us exactly what you're doing and what exactly does it print to console, more in the spirit of http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ? > scan-build: Not supported for windows. Exiting...

Thanks. I am just trying to find a relocation and linking design for Hexagon architecture, whether to follow the MIPS style of relocation or other architecture style of relocation. Thats my question . Thats why i was asking about the functions and their differences Please guide. Thanks, Siddharth On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:37 PM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: > If

(Apologies for the re-send Siddharth, I failed to cc the list) There is no existing tool that I'm aware of which performs this analysis on the AST. It is possible to do on an AST. You would just need to write an AST Visitor that finds declarations, definitions, and uses of functions. Is there a reason you need to do this at the AST level? With C code this analysis can be trivially performed

Whoops, sorry, I meant "value->replaceAllUsesWith". Should I create a new post with an updated title? Thanks Siddharth On Thu 17 Aug, 2017, 01:05 Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 August 2017 at 15:39, (IIIT) Siddharth Bhat via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > From what I have observed, using

[AMD Public Use] Hi Oliver, I get rid of the warnings by explicitly type-casting it to struct*, and still get similar results. ####################################################### struct P { float f1; float f2; float f3[3]; float f4; }; void foo(struct P* p1, struct P* p2) { p1->f2 = 1.2; p2->f1 = 3.7; } int callFoo() { struct P p; foo(&p,