[llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB generation faster

Leonardo Santagada via llvm-dev
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 23:17:17 -0000

My problem was that some library was still built with lto and I think that
forces lld to do lto, but contrary to msvc it doesn't do any warning about
it.

I think we are going to try sharding the ghashes to multiple threads and
have a hashmap that only contains the index to a list of seen types. This
way we hope there's no need for any locking.

Also we are investigating why we have 420 million types being linked while
it appears that 95-99 % of them are not being used. De  anyone know if pch
can help here? My feeling is not much as template instantiation still
generates a ton of weak symbols on the pch users, but I might be confused.

Also another idea is to create lib files with types and hashes merged,
where is llvm-lib source at? It seems funny but I don't seem to find it
anywhere.

Ps: the cmake bug for using llvm in visual studio projects has been fixed
upstream.

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 20:10, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:

> This could be ICF. There were lots of issues with ICF on ARM64, but they
> are not inherently ARM64-specific, they just come up there more often. See
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D56986 which fixes that.
>
> Easiest thing is always to profile or add /time to see what's slow.
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 6:30 AM Leonardo Santagada <santagada at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Anyone would know why lld takes > 30 minutes to link lld without
>> symbols on release?
>>
>> The command line seems simple enough:
>>
>> C:\PROGRA~1\LLVM\bin\lld-link.exe /nologo @CMakeFiles\lld.rsp
>> /out:bin\lld.exe /implib:lib\lld.lib /version:0.0 /machine:x64
>> -fuse-ld=lld /STACK:10000000 /INCREMENTAL:NO /subsystem:console
>> /MANIFEST /MANIFESTFILE:bin\lld.exe.manifest
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:20 PM Leonardo Santagada <santagada at
gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Sadly the patch on https://reviews.llvm.org/D55585 didn't
apply on my
>> > clone of llvm at all :( It will take me quite some time to test
this
>> > out.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 5:08 PM Alexandre Ganea
>> > <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > For enabling large memory pages, see this link:
>> https://support.sisoftware.co.uk/knowledgebase.php?article=52
>> > >
>> > > Meow hash isn't in the patch I posted, but you can use
xxHash, it is
>> good enough. Just add /hasher:xxhash to the LLD cmd-line.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Leonardo Santagada <santagada at gmail.com>
>> > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 11:05 AM
>> > > To: Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>
>> > > Cc: Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>; Reid
Kleckner <
>> rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB generation faster
>> > >
>> > > Times for lld compiled with LTO:
>> > >
>> > >   Input File Reading:          1430 ms (  3.3%)
>> > >   Code Layout:                  486 ms (  1.1%)
>> > >   PDB Emission (Cumulative):  41042 ms ( 94.6%)
>> > >     Add Objects:              33117 ms ( 76.4%)
>> > >       Type Merging:           25861 ms ( 59.6%)
>> > >       Symbol Merging:          7011 ms ( 16.2%)
>> > >     TPI Stream Layout:          996 ms (  2.3%)
>> > >     Globals Stream Layout:      513 ms (  1.2%)
>> > >     Commit to Disk:            5175 ms ( 11.9%)
>> > >   Commit Output File:            37 ms (  0.1%)
>> > > -------------------------------------------------
>> > > Total Link Time:              43366 ms (100.0%)
>> > >
>> > > LTO didn't help much :(
>> > >
>> > > Now I will try Alexandre patches and switch fo xxHash64 or
meow
>> hashing. I need to discover how to enable huge pages on my windows
>> > > (1809)
>> > >
>> > > ps: Need to figure out how to limit the number of link jobs
in ninja
>> as that almost used the whole 128GB of ram on my machine. On our
>> distributed build system we can limit linking jobs (which are the only
>> strict local jobs) to 8.
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:47 PM Alexandre Ganea <
>> alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > …however it is very slow to compile, because /MP isn’t
currently
>> supported by clang-cl. So each CPP is compiled sequentially, one after
>> another. Thus my patch for adding /MP.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > From: Alexandre Ganea
>> > > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:42 AM
>> > > > To: Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>;
Leonardo Santagada
>> > > > <santagada at gmail.com>
>> > > > Cc: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev
<
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > Subject: RE: [llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB generation faster
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, -Tllvm works.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > From: Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>> > > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:36 AM
>> > > > To: Leonardo Santagada <santagada at gmail.com>
>> > > > Cc: Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at
ubisoft.com>; Reid Kleckner
>> > > > <rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB generation faster
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Is -Tllvm even supported? I thought the only thing you
could pass
>> for
>> > > > -T was -Thost=x64
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:52 AM Leonardo Santagada <
>> santagada at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I think its a huge bug that it doesn't raise any
errors or warnings
>> > > > about it. But I will open a ticket on cmake, they should
be using
>> > > > clang-cl.exe and lld-link.exe if T="llvm"
probably set host to 64
>> bit
>> > > > as well.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:34 PM Zachary Turner
<zturner at google.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I don’t think changing the compiler or linker is
supported with
>> the
>> > > > > vs generator, but I also don’t think it’s a bug On
Mon, Feb 25,
>> 2019 at 6:31 AM Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>
wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Can you please try using Ninja instead?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> cmake -G Ninja f:/svn/llvm
-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_OPTIMIZED_TABLEGEN=true
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_EXTERNAL_LLD_SOURCE_DIR=f:/svn/lld
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_TOOL_LLD_BUILD=true
-DLLVM_ENABLE_LLD=true
>> > > > >> -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="C:/Program
Files/LLVM/bin/clang-cl.exe"
>> > > > >> -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="C:/Program
Files/LLVM/bin/clang-cl.exe"
>> > > > >> -DCMAKE_LINKER="C:/Program
Files/LLVM/bin/lld-link.exe"
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_ENABLE_PDB=true
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> It will be faster to compile. The setup I use
is the above Ninja
>> cmd-line for compiling optimized builds; and in addition, I keep the
Visual
>> Studio generator, as you do, but only for having a .sln to debug. It is
a
>> bit annoying to cmake twice, in two different build folders, but you
can
>> write a batch script.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> If the above works, maybe you should log the
bug on
>> https://bugs.llvm.org/ so it is not forgotten.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Alex.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >> From: Leonardo Santagada <santagada at
gmail.com>
>> > > > >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:04 AM
>> > > > >> To: Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at
ubisoft.com>
>> > > > >> Cc: Zachary Turner <zturner at
google.com>; Reid Kleckner
>> > > > >> <rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB
generation faster
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Ok so there's a lot of confusion on cmake
regarding using llvm
>> as a toolset. It still does all its checks against cl.exe (not
clang-cl)
>> and somehow overriders CMAKE_LINKER to be link.exe. I tried a couple of
>> places including:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> cmake -G "Visual Studio 15 2017" -A
x64 -T"llvm",host=x64
>> -DCMAKE_LINKER="C:/Program Files/LLVM/bin/lld-link.exe"
>> > > > >> -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="C:/Program
Files/LLVM/bin/clang-cl.exe"
>> > > > >> -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="C:/Program
Files/LLVM/bin/clang-cl.exe"
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_ENABLE_LTO=true -DLLVM_ENABLE_PDB=true
>> > > > >> -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=lld  ../llvm
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> but it seems like the generator overrides it.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> ps: Created a phabricator account
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:48 PM Alexandre Ganea
<
>> alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > That's good news. For having debug
info, you could try adding
>> /Z7 on the cmake cmd-line, such as -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="/Z7".
Or use the
>> 'RelWithDebInfo' target instead of 'Release' and add
>> -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="/Ob2" (because that target uses /Ob1 as a
default).
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Can you please send a patch on Phabricator
if you fix the
>> LLVM_ENABLE_PDB issue with Clang? The goal is to have performance
>> out-of-the-box.
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Alex.
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >> > From: Leonardo Santagada <santagada at
gmail.com>
>> > > > >> > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 7:36 AM
>> > > > >> > To: Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at
ubisoft.com>
>> > > > >> > Cc: Zachary Turner <zturner at
google.com>; Reid Kleckner
>> > > > >> > <rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > >> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making LLD PDB
generation faster
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > With your patch for cmake and
reconfiguring it with "cmake -G
>> "Visual Studio 15 2017" -A x64 -T"llvm",host=x64
-DLLVM_ENABLE_PDB=true
>> -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=lld  ../llvm" we get these results:
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> >   Input File Reading:          1602 ms (
3.5%)
>> > > > >> >   Code Layout:                  493 ms (
1.1%)
>> > > > >> >   PDB Emission (Cumulative):  43127 ms (
94.5%)
>> > > > >> >     Add Objects:              34577 ms (
75.8%)
>> > > > >> >       Type Merging:           26709 ms (
58.5%)
>> > > > >> >       Symbol Merging:          7598 ms (
16.7%)
>> > > > >> >     TPI Stream Layout:         1107 ms (
2.4%)
>> > > > >> >     Globals Stream Layout:      602 ms (
1.3%)
>> > > > >> >     Commit to Disk:            5636 ms (
12.4%)
>> > > > >> >   Commit Output File:            16 ms (
0.0%)
>> > > > >> >
-------------------------------------------------
>> > > > >> > Total Link Time:              45626 ms
(100.0%)
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Unfortunately there were no pdb generated
with lld.exe (or any
>> > > > >> > other
>> > > > >> > binaries) so I can't debug them. It
seems like LLVM_ENABLE_PDB
>> is not made to support using clang to complie itself as it tries to att
/Zi
>> to the targets instead of /Z7 and global hashes. I can patch it over
here,
>> but we probably want to fix this in cmake and on the docs, as its not
clear
>> at all how to compile lld in a performance 64bit way.
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:38 AM Alexandre
Ganea <
>> alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > How do you compile LLD? There's a
big difference between when
>> > > > >> > > using MSVC vs Clang. The parallel
ghash patch I was
>> mentioning
>> > > > >> > > is almost 2x as fast when using Clang
7.0+ vs. MSVC 15.9+, I
>> > > > >> > > don't know exactly why. I also
suggest you use the Release
>> target. You should also grab this patch:
>> > > > >> > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D55056 - I
had to revert it
>> because it
>> > > > >> > > was causing issues with LLDB. But it
will give an
>> improvement for LLD.
>> > > > >> > > Please let me know if that improves
your timings.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > The page faults are probably the OS
loading from disk: most,
>> if
>> > > > >> > > not all the files are accessed by LLD
by mmap'ing them.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > The lockless DenseHash I was talking
about will be published
>> in
>> > > > >> > > an upcoming patch. As for
reproducibility, this can be an
>> issue
>> > > > >> > > on build systems. But on local
machines, we could explicitly
>> > > > >> > > state that we want non-deterministic
builds, through some
>> cmd-line flag. If your 57sec for "Type Merging"
>> > > > >> > > transforms into 5sec when
non-deterministic, I think that's
>> worth it.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Alex.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >> > > From: Leonardo Santagada
<santagada at gmail.com>
>> > > > >> > > Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 6:43
PM
>> > > > >> > > To: Alexandre Ganea
<alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>
>> > > > >> > > Cc: Zachary Turner <zturner at
google.com>; Reid Kleckner
>> > > > >> > > <rnk at google.com>; llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > >> > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making LLD
PDB generation faster
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > More info inline, I think there is a
couple of
>> misconceptions on what I'm doing:
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > 1) I already patch all my .obj files
to contain .debug$H
>> > > > >> > > entries so it is all ghashed already
>> > > > >> > > 2) All the 35s is spent adding to the
DenseMap
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Here is my current times
(lld-link.exe compiled with -O2 so
>> no lto/pgo), lld generates a 141 MB binary and 1.2GB pdb file:
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >   Input File Reading:          1724
ms (  2.1%)
>> > > > >> > >   Code Layout:                  482
ms (  0.6%)
>> > > > >> > >   PDB Emission (Cumulative):  79261
ms ( 96.8%)
>> > > > >> > >     Add Objects:              68650
ms ( 83.8%)
>> > > > >> > >       Type Merging:           57534
ms ( 70.2%)
>> > > > >> > >       Symbol Merging:         10822
ms ( 13.2%)
>> > > > >> > >     TPI Stream Layout:         1501
ms (  1.8%)
>> > > > >> > >     Globals Stream Layout:      770
ms (  0.9%)
>> > > > >> > >     Commit to Disk:            7007
ms (  8.6%)
>> > > > >> > >   Commit Output File:            19
ms (  0.0%)
>> > > > >> > >
-------------------------------------------------
>> > > > >> > > Total Link Time:              81900
ms (100.0%)
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Our target is for < 20 seconds
linking, anything bellow 40
>> seconds would be ok. Ideal times would be around 8s (in which it will
>> mostly beat link.exe incremental linking).
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > My tip for profiling is using
superluminal
>> > > > >> > > (https://www.superluminal.eu/) its
the easiest way to see
>> everything your code is doing.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 5:18 PM
Alexandre Ganea <
>> alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Leonardo, to answer to your
questions, yes to all of them J
>> > > > >> > > > You can take a
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > look at this prototype/proposal:
>> > > > >> > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D55585
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Overall, computing ghashes in
parallel at link-time and
>> > > > >> > > > merging Types with them
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > is less costly that the current
approach to merging. The
>> > > > >> > > > 35sec you’re seeing
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > for merging should go down to
about 15sec.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > I don't do much computing of
ghashes as we already
>> preprocess all .obj files from msvc to add a .debug$H to them. The
whole 35
>> seconds is spent in just densehash findbucket function. The rest of the
>> time is mostly pagefaults (I guess to load in obj data and to grow the
>> final pdb?).
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > > The patch doesn’t parallelize
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > (yet) the Type merging itself,
but we have an alternate
>> > > > >> > > > multithread-suitable
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > implementation of DenseHash
which already supports
>> lockless,
>> > > > >> > > > wait-free,
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > insert/fetch/resize.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Where is this lockless densehash?
This is the part were I
>> would love to help, but if there is a densehash it is probably just
>> creating the threads and letting them merge the results. I'm a bit
afraid
>> of reproduceability of builds, but as we already don't have that
with
>> link.exe we are not really loosing anything.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > The prototype allows for testing
different hashing
>> > > > >> > > > algorithms, and indeed
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > xxHash seems to be the best
general-purpose choice. I’ve
>> also
>> > > > >> > > > added support
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > for more specialized
hardware-based hashes, like Casey
>> > > > >> > > > Muratori’s Meow Hash
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > (uses hardware AES SSE 4.2
instructions), which brings the
>> figures down a bit.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > I remembered Meow hashes needing at
least k bytes of data,
>> but looking at their website right now there is no mention of it.
Hashing
>> performance isn't much of an impact as we do it per .obj file
distributed
>> through our company so the time to calculate those are completely
>> distributed.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Future changes could write back
the computed ghash stream
>> > > > >> > > > back to OBJs if
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > /INCREMENTAL is specified (just
an idea). Incrementally
>> > > > >> > > > linking will be faster
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > that way when working with MSVC
OBJs.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > I already have a patch for
llvm-objcopy that adds a
>> > > > >> > > -add-ghashes option that does this, I
will be cleaning it up
>> > > > >> > > this week and sending a PR for it
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > As for creating PDBs for
independent projects, that would
>> help most likely.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > However the ghash stream would
need to be stored in the PDB
>> > > > >> > > > in that case
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > (currently, ghashes are dropped
after merging). That could
>> > > > >> > > > help when using
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > rarely compiled projects, used
along with network caches.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > I meant actually a .lib, with all the
obj files inside plus
>> a merged .debug$H entry. No pdb generation or changes necessary, we
just
>> run the same code that merges types in lld and do that a the librarian
>> level.
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > I will start sending smaller
patches to converge towards
>> the
>> > > > >> > > > functionally of
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > the prototype above.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Best,
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Alex.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > From: Zachary Turner <zturner
at google.com>
>> > > > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019
1:20 AM
>> > > > >> > > > To: Leonardo Santagada
<santagada at gmail.com>
>> > > > >> > > > Cc: Alexandre Ganea
<alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>; Reid
>> > > > >> > > > Kleckner <rnk at
google.com>; llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > > > >> > > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Making
LLD PDB generation faster
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > +Reid and Alexandre, who have
been doing work in this area
>> > > > >> > > > +recently
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 4:07 AM
Leonardo Santagada via
>> llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Hi,
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Is anyone working on making the
PDB generation on LLD
>> faster?
>> > > > >> > > > Looking of a trace for linking
one of our binaries (it
>> takes
>> > > > >> > > > 1min6s-1min20s) I see two
things:
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > 1) LookupBucketFor(Val,
ConstFoundBucket); takes 35s so
>> > > > >> > > > almost half of the time of
linking, mostly finding
>> duplicates
>> > > > >> > > > 2) There is no parallelization
inside of addObjectsToPDB
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Is anyone working on those? Also
has anyone thought about
>> > > > >> > > > merging .obj files to
deduplicate type infomation so we can
>> > > > >> > > > do the linking on projects to
generate something like a lib
>> > > > >> > > > file, but deduplicated debug
information (as far as I know
>> > > > >> > > > actual .lib just put all pdbs or
>> > > > >> > > > /Z7 debug info inside a file
without dedup).
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Just looking at the code it
seems it is much more mature
>> and
>> > > > >> > > > also the choice of SHA1_8 seems
interesting (still don't
>> know
>> > > > >> > > > why not use xxHash64).
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > ps: My code to add ghashes to
msvc compiled .obj files is
>> > > > >> > > > almost ready to be pushed as an
option for llvm-objcopy.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > --
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Leonardo Santagada
>> > > > >> > > >
_______________________________________________
>> > > > >> > > > LLVM Developers mailing list
>> > > > >> > > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > > > >> > > >
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > --
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Leonardo Santagada
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > --
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Leonardo Santagada
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> --
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Leonardo Santagada
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > Leonardo Santagada
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >
>> > > Leonardo Santagada
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Leonardo Santagada
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Leonardo Santagada
>>
> --

Leonardo Santagada
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190228/1601d2f4/attachment-0001.html>