search for: alireza

...account has 77GB of data[1], but there some files with more than 100GB[2], in fact, two of then have more than 200GB[3]. The OS is Opensuse 10.2 x86_64. Has anyone seem something like this? How can I inspect more closely what is going on? Thanks Marcelo [1] maryland:/maryland2 # du -sh alireza/ 77G alireza/ maryland:/maryland2 # [2] maryland:~ # find /maryland2/alireza/ -size +100G -print /maryland2/alireza/Restart/1to1-2/events-cfluid-rem-add-pasi/test.rsi /maryland2/alireza/Restart/1to1-2/lqfCyclic/Restart/a.rsi /maryland2/alireza/Restart/1to1-2/lqfCyclic/a.rsi maryland:~ # [3] m...

...mping is not yet supported for buffer API, but since you are using Front-end based instrumentation/profile-use, value profiler is not turned on by default anyway. David On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 19, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Moshtaghi, Alireza < > Alireza.Moshtaghi at netapp.com> wrote: > > Thank you > So it does not seem to be relevant for what I’m trying to do. > I’m doing something unconventional. > The objective is to implement PGO and code coverage on a system that does > not exit and does not have any fil...

...s A On 11/16/20, 9:48 AM, "Fāng-ruì Sòng" <maskray at google.com> wrote: NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 9:05 AM Moshtaghi, Alireza <Alireza.Moshtaghi at netapp.com> wrote: > > My target requires that text section be at 0x0 so "-Ttext 0x0" is passed to the linker. > When I link with gold, it goes through; but lld fails. > Instead of always returning the same calculation, when I ch...

...section of the traditional concept "text segment" (which does not apply with LLD layout and GNU ld's -z separate-code layout) You need to use --image-base=0 https://releases.llvm.org/10.0.0/tools/lld/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#breaking-changes On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:31 AM Moshtaghi, Alireza <Alireza.Moshtaghi at netapp.com> wrote: > > Actually it is the combination of -Ttext 0x0 and --no-rosegment that cause the problem. You can reproduce using any c file using following: > clang test.c -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,-Ttext,0x0 -Wl,--no-rosegment > > A > > On 11/16/20, 9...

...but seems like something is going wrong because because fprofile-instr-use does not find profile data for the source files. Any suggestion? Thanks A From: <vsk at apple.com> on behalf of Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com> Date: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 11:32 AM To: "Moshtaghi, Alireza" <Alireza.Moshtaghi at netapp.com> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Question about : lprofValueProfNodes Hi, On Dec 19, 2017, at 10:26 AM, Moshtaghi, Alireza via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm...

Below I have pasted the latest design that we discussed... Now we would like to pick it up and do the implementation. 1) Is there any last change that we would like to add? 2) Has anyone been working on it? I haven't seen any thing new in the code so I assume the answer is no... Thanks Alireza Moshtaghi Senior Software Engineer Development Systems, Microchip Technology Subject: Troubling promotion of return value to Integer ... On May 29, 2008, at 10:30 AM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at ...> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at ... > wrote: > Let me summarize what we discussed so far: &gt...

...? A. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Lattner Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:23 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] C embedded extensions and LLVM On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:56 AM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com > wrote: > Christopher, > It has been a while since we last talked about C embedded extensions > in > LLVM, I was moving back and froth from project to project and didn't > get > a chance to follow...

...stions. Regards A. ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Christopher Lamb Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:59 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] C embedded extensions and LLVM Alireza, I have added full support for embedded C address spaces to the LLVM IR (see http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#t_pointer). I have not added any support for the fractional types and their operators, though I think this would simply require adding the necessary intrinsics, which is one of the ea...

...alue? of course then the question would be if they are also applicable to parameters too? (because we use same attributes for parameters and return value)? or should we disallow then on parameters? Thoughts? A. ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu on behalf of Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com Sent: Wed 3/4/2009 11:41 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] promotion of return value. Below I have pasted the latest design that we discussed... Now we would like to pick it up and do the implementation. 1) Is there any last change that we would like to...

...h. Do you think this is correct? Thanks A On 11/15/20, 11:19 PM, "Fāng-ruì Sòng" <maskray at google.com> wrote: NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Alireza, getFileAlignment was renamed in Oct 2018. It seems that you may have sectionA and sectionB in one PT_LOAD while sectionB has a lower address. This is invalid. Can you provide more information about how you have a sectionB with a lower address? Note that LLD has an error "unab...

Alireza, I have added full support for embedded C address spaces to the LLVM IR (see http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#t_pointer). I have not added any support for the fractional types and their operators, though I think this would simply require adding the necessary intrinsics, which is one of th...

...run into problems later. So I would like to see if anybody has a better answer for us. I guess the most important question is how best (if possible) can I clone a function before or during codegen. Currently we are cloning the function in AsmPrinter but it does not look good to me. Any thoughts? Alireza Moshtaghi Senior Software Engineer Development Systems, Microchip Technology

Hi List, Does anybody know what function I need to use for a simple regression? Here is the data: I want to find the value for x1=3.5 data<-data.frame(x=c(1:30),Value=c(31:60)) x1<-3.5 Regards, Alireza [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 2020-06-02, Moshtaghi, Alireza wrote: >Sorry for the cryptic code but I had to modify stuff from original >In the following example see the difference when you comment or uncomment the line in the linker script: >============ test.c ============= : >struct orphan_dummy_anno_s { > void (*func)(void); >}; > &g...

...? A. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Lattner Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 5:01 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit! On Sep 28, 2007, at 4:53 PM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> wrote: > ExpandOp is not called at all. > In SelectionDAGLegalize::HandleOp() only the ValueType is > considered in > the switch statement to decide if it is legal or promote or expand. > As I trace back (...

...Thanks. A. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Evan Cheng Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 11:22 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit! On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com wrote: > Thank you Evan, > I added the return Type::Int8Ty to the switch statement to get it to > work. > I don't know if this can have other consequences, I haven't yet > verified > if the generated Legalized DAG is correct though. If this w...

...ct though. A. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Evan Cheng Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 3:23 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit! On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com wrote: > So does that mean that LLVM can't lower automatically to 8-bit values? There is no inherent reason. LLVM should be able to lower to 8-bit values. It's probably a bug somewhere. In TargetLowering.h: bool isTypeLegal(MVT::ValueType VT) const {...

Any thoughts on this? I would like to get it right before jumping into the nuts and bolts of it.... Thanks ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:39 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] promotion of return value. Previously we talked about adding new attributes to function to identify the promotion class. > sign_ext_from_i8, sign_ext_from_i16 > zero_...

...ut it concerns me when you say modifying alloca to global references seems a more robust way of doing it. Could you elaborate on this? Thanks A. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Lattner [mailto:sabre at nondot.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:29 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Cc: Alireza Moshtaghi - C13012 Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] overlay attribute On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:44 AM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com > wrote: > I would like to make the following target specific modifications to > clang and would like to get some...

...Ali. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Lattner Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:55 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit! On Sep 28, 2007, at 1:10 PM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> wrote: > Attached please find the gdb backtrace dump and the postscript file of > the DAG right before assertion. > The red Node is the current Node in LegalizeOp() Okay, this is the problem. LegalizeOp should o...