Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "146864".
Did you mean:
14664
2012 Jul 19
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM compile speed significantly slower than GCC (w/ test case)
Thanks, Matt. This is great information. Sounds like Chandler is looking into the details of what's going on.
-Jim
On Jul 19, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Matt Fischer <mattfischer84 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been doing some profiling of LLVM on our codebase, to see how it
> stacks up to the existing GCC build that we do. The primary thing I'm
> focusing on at the moment is
2012 Jul 19
4
[LLVMdev] LLVM compile speed significantly slower than GCC (w/ test case)
I've been doing some profiling of LLVM on our codebase, to see how it
stacks up to the existing GCC build that we do. The primary thing I'm
focusing on at the moment is build speed, and in this regard LLVM
seems to be pretty all over the map. On some files it seems to go
quite a bit faster than GCC, and on others it's slower, leading to an
aggregate build time for our repository
2012 Aug 20
1
[LLVMdev] PATCH: A new SROA implementation
...> Hello all! I've been busy working on a somewhat larger patch than usual,
> and Duncan indicated I should get a copy out to the list. This is
> essentially the re-thinking of my approach after this discussion:
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20120716/146864.html
> I want to emphasize this is still a bit rough around the edges. =]
>
>
> There are several very serious problems with SROA today:
>
> - It is subject to the bane of my existence in optimizations: arbitrary
> thresholds.
> - It is overly conservative about what all con...