[cfe-dev] Can I establish a relation between a SCoP in LLVM-IR and the corresponding line number in C-code?

[Pieter Custers]

On 17 jan 2012, at 16:02, Sven Verdoolaege wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 03:19:03PM +0100, Pieter Custers wrote:
>> 1) pet would be okay to use, but then I loose the ability to transform loops in a canonical form (now I use a LLVM pass for that). Right?
> 
> No.  pet tries very hard not to canonicalize loops in order
> to maintain a direct relationship between the original loop
> variables and the elements of the iteration domains, but sometimes
> it is forced to do so anyway.  If you really need your loops to
> be in some canonical form, then it shouldn't be too hard
> to add an option to pet to always canonicalize.

Well, its not that I really need them in a canonical form. This is needed for Polly to output information in a polyhedral form. What I need is polyhedral information about loops/loop-nests in the source code to analyze them. The analyzed information must stay in relation to the source code as this information is input to a tool that does a source2source compilation on the source-code. Can I use pet for this?

> 
> Now, there may be other reasons why you may prefer
> working on IR over working at the source level, but loop
> normalization should not be one of them.
> 
> skimo

Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120117/f428a693/attachment.html>