search for: chfast

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:03 PM Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Paweł Bylica" <chfast at gmail.com> > > To: "David Majnemer" <david.majnemer at gmail.com> > > Cc: "LLVMdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 5:42:24 AM > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] extractelement causes memory access violation - > what...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paweł Bylica" <chfast at gmail.com> > To: "LLVMdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 8:45:11 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Problems with instruction scheduling > > > > Any comments? Not in particular, but I think we're pretty close to applying a rewrite...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pete Cooper" <peter_cooper at apple.com> > To: "Paweł Bylica" <chfast at gmail.com> > Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "LLVMdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 12:08:37 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] extractelement causes memory access violation - what to do? > > Sorry for chiming in so l...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pete Cooper" <peter_cooper at apple.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVMdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Paweł Bylica" <chfast at gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 6:42:41 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] extractelement causes memory access violation - what to do? > > > > On Jul 1, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- &gt...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paweł Bylica" <chfast at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVMdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Jonas Paulsson" <jonas.paulsson at ericsson.com> > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 9:19:14 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Problems with instruction...

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:30 PM Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: > Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:55 PM Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> > wrote: > > > > Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> writes: > > > I can confirm that the issue has been caused by NDEBUG flag. > > > &...

...would like to identify the issues and discuss long term solutions. I started with building very simple test framework that checks different Ubuntu/Debian versions and currently supported LLVM versions. The first and only test just checks find_package(LLVM CONFIG) cmake function. https://github.com/chfast/llvm-apt-tests/blob/master/CMakeLists.txt I've tested {3.8, 3.9, 4.0} x {xenial, jessie} using docker images and Travis CI. https://travis-ci.org/chfast/llvm-apt-tests/builds/146508275 As you can see, only the 3.8 on Jessie passed the test. Issues I've identified: 1. Packaging adds ve...

...t; > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Pete Cooper" < peter_cooper at apple.com > > > > > To: "Hal Finkel" < hfinkel at anl.gov > > > Cc: "LLVMdev" < llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >, "Paweł Bylica" < > > chfast at gmail.com > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 6:42:41 PM > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] extractelement causes memory access > > violation - what to do? > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov > wrote: > > >...

On 06/26/2015 08:42 AM, David Majnemer wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com > <mailto:chfast at gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Let's have a simple program: > define i32 @main(i32 %n, i64 %idx) { > %idxSafe = trunc i64 %idx to i5 > %r = extractelement <4 x i32> <i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -...

...o I recommend option 3. :) > > If you're using MCJIT you can override the findSymbol method on the > MemoryManager. If you're using ORC you can pass a custom resolver to > addModuleSet. > > Cheers, > Lang. > > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi LLVM, Lang. >> >> I'm looking for a advice here. And I truly understand very little what >> the relocations are and how they work. >> >> The problem I want to solve is the case where a jitted code has to call >> back t...

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:55 PM Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: > Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> writes: > > I can confirm that the issue has been caused by NDEBUG flag. > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 6:29 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > > > > The layout of AssertingVH has depended on NDEBUG since 2009, which > >...

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 5:42 PM David Majnemer <david.majnemer at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Let's have a simple program: >> define i32 @main(i32 %n, i64 %idx) { >> %idxSafe = trunc i64 %idx to i5 >> %r = extractelement <4 x i32> <i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -1>, i64 %idx >> ret i32 %r...

...introduced fro stores: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/23bbeb52f392d88bf0d0527392a7a11561ee09c0/llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/DAGCombiner.cpp#L6700 > > There is no load widening on the IR level as of now. > > Artur > > On 11 Sep 2019, at 04:47, Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Can I ask what is the status of load widening. It seems there is no load > widening on IR at all. > > // Paweł > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >>...

Hi, Let's have a simple program: define i32 @main(i32 %n, i64 %idx) { %idxSafe = trunc i64 %idx to i5 %r = extractelement <4 x i32> <i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -1, i32 -1>, i64 %idx ret i32 %r } The assembly of that would be: pcmpeqd %xmm0, %xmm0 movdqa %xmm0, -24(%rsp) movl -24(%rsp,%rsi,4), %eax retq The language reference states that the extractelement instruction produces

Hi, I'm trying to fix PR23405 <https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23405> - assert failure during instruction scheduling in llc. I have related but more generic questions. Is there any higher level description of the algorithm used for instruction scheduling in this case? It is new area for me and I would love to see bigger picture. My currently smallest test case contains 90 DAG

Hi, I'm interested in any information about implementations of switch instruction and its runtime cost. If it's very target dependent, I'm mostly care about X86. Pointing some LLVM code is also good. - Paweł -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20141027/285f02e5/attachment.html>

...Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev wrote: > Implementing load combine/widening on the IR level sounds like a > reasonable enhancement to me. Although, we (Azul) don't have any plans > of doing that in the near future. > > Artur > >> On 12 Sep 2019, at 00:58, Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com >> <mailto:chfast at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Ok, thanks. >> >> Are there any plans to reintroduce it on the IR level? I'm not >> confident this is strictly necessary, but in some cases not having >> load widening ends up really...

Hi Team, I observer that division of __int128 bit is very heavy operation. It internally call a routine '__udivti3', which internally call ' __udivmodti4'. Due to it the overall performance is much much slower (almost 15 time slower than if I do it via a combination of 64-bit or microsoft '_udiv128'). Also what to know if I can directly call below routine directly from

...mail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 12:27 To: Paweł Bylica Cc: Fedorova, Vera; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Buildbot for Windows native LLVM/Clang testing r235576 Window7 Visual C++ 2013 x64 just passed regression OK on my system. 2015-04-23 12:19 GMT+03:00 Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com<mailto:chfast at gmail.com>>: I agree, it is great. I have some regression tests (check-all) failures on Windows locally. Does the buildbot show the same? On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:16 AM Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com<mailto:yaron.keren at gmail.com>> wrot...

Hi, I think ExecutionEngine as a common interface for both Interpreter and MCJIT is almost useless in the current form. There are separated methods in ExecutionEngine for similar or the same features provided by Interpreter and MCJIT, i.e. to get a pointer to function you should call getPointerToFunction() for Interpreter or getFunctionAddress() for MCJIT. Personally, I'm using MCJIT and