Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "0.2491".
Did you mean:
0.241
2016 Dec 17
19
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
First of all, sorry for the long mail.
Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
the same for llvm.
I'm personally very interested in build-time for LTO configuration,
with particular attention to the time spent in the optimizer.
Rafael did something similar back in March, so this can be considered
as an update. This tries to include a more accurate high-level
2016 Dec 18
1
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 17, 2016, at 1:35 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> First of all, sorry for the long mail.
>> Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
>> the same for llvm.
>> I'm personally very
2016 Dec 18
0
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
> On Dec 17, 2016, at 1:35 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> First of all, sorry for the long mail.
> Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
> the same for llvm.
> I'm personally very interested in build-time for LTO configuration,
> with particular attention to the time spent in the optimizer.
>
2016 Dec 18
0
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
> On Dec 17, 2016, at 1:35 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> First of all, sorry for the long mail.
> Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
> the same for llvm.
> I'm personally very interested in build-time for LTO configuration,
> with particular attention to the time spent in the optimizer.
>
2016 Dec 18
0
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
On 12/17/2016 01:35 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev wrote:
> First of all, sorry for the long mail.
> Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
> the same for llvm.
> I'm personally very interested in build-time for LTO configuration,
> with particular attention to the time spent in the optimizer.
> Rafael did something similar back in March, so
2016 Dec 18
0
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> First of all, sorry for the long mail.
> Inspired by the excellent analysis Rui did for lld, I decided to do
> the same for llvm.
> I'm personally very interested in build-time for LTO configuration,
> with particular attention to the time spent in the optimizer.
>
2016 Dec 20
0
llvm (the middle-end) is getting slower, December edition
Hi Davide,
Thanks for the analysis, it's really interesting! And I'm really glad that we now put more and more attention at the compile time!
Just recently I've been looking into historical compile time data as well, and have had similar conclusions. The regressions you've found are probably caused by:
1) r289813 and r289855 - new matchers in InstCombine
2) r286814 and r288024 -