similar to: mutateType on AllocaInst problem

Hi Jan, > I've been looking into how to make llvm bitcode files smaller. There is one > simple change that appears to shrink linked bitcode files by about 15%. See > this spreadsheet for some rough data: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjRrJHQc4_bddEtJdjdIek5fMDdIdFFIZldZXzdWa0E the improvement is wonderful! ... > In any case, the patch is attached if

> On 2016-Apr-21, at 11:41, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> I am currently making some BitcodeWriter changes that involve some refactoring, and am thinking for the Nth time that it would be much nicer to have a class instead of passing around a long

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > On 2017-Apr-04, at 12:12, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>

Hi all, I've been looking into how to make llvm bitcode files smaller. There is one simple change that appears to shrink linked bitcode files by about 15%. See this spreadsheet for some rough data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjRrJHQc4_bddEtJdjdIek5fMDdIdFFIZldZXzdWa0E The change is in how operand ids are encoded in bitcode files. Rather than use an "absolute

I am currently making some BitcodeWriter changes that involve some refactoring, and am thinking for the Nth time that it would be much nicer to have a class instead of passing around a long list of parameters. I am thinking of biting the bullet and doing that - any objections? I assume the reason why there is no existing class wrapping the bitcode writing process is just legacy code and nothing

Hi there, I added a function to a module, but failed to write the bitcode to file because it hit the: assert(I != ValueMap.end() && "Value not in slotcalculator!") So I added some diagnosis information there, unsigned ValueEnumerator::getValueID(const Value *V) const { if (isa<MDNode>(V) || isa<MDString>(V)) { ValueMapType::const_iterator I =

Hello everyone, I'm struggling to get a working LLVM installation on MinGW on Windows Vista. I have the following packages: * LLVM 2.4 * Gnu make 3.81 * GCC 3.4.5 (mingw-vista special r3) * Perl 5.6.1 * Texinfo 4.11 * LD (which I took to be representative of Binutils version) 2.17.50 20060824 None of these are marked "bad" in your compatibility matrix, but not many of them are

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode files to contain multiple modules. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786> I took a step

I've attached a preliminary patch for `MDLocation` as a follow-up to the RFC [1] last week. It's not commit-ready -- in particular, it squashes a bunch of commits together and doesn't pass `make check` -- but I think it's close enough to indicate the direction and work toward consensus. [1]: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-October/077715.html IMO, the files to

Hello, On windows, the standard output is not set to binary mode by default so all '\n' characters are replaced with '\r\n'. This is a pain for any command using stdout, like "llvm-as < input.ll > out.bc", because out.bc is then most likely corrupted. This is an old story, fixed a while ago: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=787 And here is the thread on

Hi Steve, Several people told me that LLVM TOT bcreader can read odder version of bitcode without any problem. Do you know the oldest version of bitcode that the TOT bitcode reader supports? Also, why do you generate bitcode instead of the textural representation, i.e. the "ll" file, for older version of LLVM? I guess generating "ll" code is simpler. Another approach I am

Hi all, As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode files to contain multiple modules. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786 I took a step towards that by proposing a change to the module format so that the block info block is stored at the top level. The next step is to think about what the

> > I also have a look at the code, looks like it directly parse the bitcode > and build in memory representation in a different LLVM version than the > bitcode. Is this correct? According to your description, I guess the BitCodeWriter should be the one > to do the bitcode version downgrade, right? I think so. I don't know much about it and don't want to give you

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 4, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi,

On Sep 25, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Jan Voung <jvoung at chromium.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been looking into how to make llvm bitcode files smaller. There is one simple change that appears to shrink linked bitcode files by about 15%. See this spreadsheet for some rough data: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjRrJHQc4_bddEtJdjdIek5fMDdIdFFIZldZXzdWa0E

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for > ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode > files to contain multiple

Hello Everyone, I am trying to create two modules in LLVM, where first module contains the definition of a function, gcd in this example and another module contains a call to this function. My example is based on the following tutorial, with a few changes. http://llvm.org/releases/2.6/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial2.html When I execute the verifier pass on my modules, it complains that the

> On Aug 2, 2016, at 8:38 PM, Stephen Hines via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Hongbin, > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Hongbin Zheng <etherzhhb at gmail.com <mailto:etherzhhb at gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Several people told me that LLVM TOT bcreader can read odder version of bitcode without any problem. Do you know the

> On Aug 2, 2016, at 8:49 PM, Stephen Hines <srhines at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Aug 2, 2016, at 8:38 PM, Stephen Hines via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>