search for: andrea_dibiagio

On 29 May 2013 09:28, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I just wanted to bump this discussion in case anyone had any more comments > to make. > > We're in a bit of a bind here as we've now had requests for this feature > from 10 separate customers, so we're going to be required to impl...

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:06 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: > Hi David, > >> Regarding Andrea's proposal -- the new #pragma can be useful (in rare >> cases when there is a compiler bug), the intended use cases are >> questionable: >> 1) it should not be used as a mechanism to triage compiler bugs -...

Hi, I just wanted to bump this discussion in case anyone had any more comments to make. We're in a bit of a bind here as we've now had requests for this feature from 10 separate customers, so we're going to be required to implement this feature somehow in our private branch at least (all of the other compilers they use already support some form of this feature so it is very

On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:00 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: > Hello, > > We've had a high priority feature request from a number of our customers > to > provide per-function optimization in our Clang/LLVM compiler. > I would be interested in working with the community to implement this. > The idea is to al...

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:06 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: >> Hi David, >> >>> Regarding Andrea's proposal -- the new #pragma can be useful (in rare >>> cases when there is a compiler bug), the intended use cases are >>> questionable: >>> 1) it should not be used as a mechanism t...

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Xinliang David Li > <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:06 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: >>> Hi David, >>> >>>> Regarding Andrea's proposal -- the new #pragma can be useful (in rare >>>> cases when there is a compiler bug), the intended use cases are >>>> questionable: >>>> 1) it should not...

...y this I mean, it is possible that throughout the optimization phases, there is an implied assumption that all functions are similarly optimized. An example would be under certain optimization flag, compiler changes calling convention of static functions. - Fariborz On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > Hi, > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for > the previous discussion)...

...hroughout the optimization phases, there is an implied assumption that all > functions > are similarly optimized. An example would be under certain optimization > flag, compiler changes > calling convention of static functions. > > - Fariborz > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > > Hi, > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for > the previous discussion)...

...there is an implied assumption that all >> functions >> are similarly optimized. An example would be under certain optimization >> flag, compiler changes >> calling convention of static functions. >> >> - Fariborz >> >> On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function >> optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers >> (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for &gt...

Hi Andrea, This would be very useful. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:58 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for > the previous discussion), however...

...tion > flag, compiler changes > calling convention of static functions. Forgive my ignorance, but aren't all functions in the compilation unit optimized at the same level? It does not matter if its a user supplied command line or a makefile recipe. Jeff > On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > > Hi, > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for > the previous discussion)...

Hello, We've had a high priority feature request from a number of our customers to provide per-function optimization in our Clang/LLVM compiler. I would be interested in working with the community to implement this. The idea is to allow the optimization level to be overridden for specific functions. The rest of this proposal is organized as follows: - Section 1. describes this new feature

Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > So.. > I have investigated more on how a new function attribute to disable > optimization on a per-function basis could be implemented. > At the current state, with the lack of specific support from the pass > managers I found two big problems when trying to i...

Hi, I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for the previous discussion), however the discussion was inconclusive. Some of my colleagues recently had the opportunity to discuss the proposal with a number of people at and

Especially since we have support for per function code gen attributes now. -eric On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:00 AM, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> We've had a high priority feature request from a number of our customers >> to >> provide per-function optimization in our Clang/LLVM compiler. >> I would be interested in working with the community to implem...

Hi David, > Regarding Andrea's proposal -- the new #pragma can be useful (in rare > cases when there is a compiler bug), the intended use cases are > questionable: > 1) it should not be used as a mechanism to triage compiler bugs -- the > compiler backend should have mechanism to allow any pass to be > disabled for any (range of) function(s) via command line options so >

Hi Jonathan, > From: Jonathan Sauer <jonathan.sauer at gmx.de> > Have you looked at "Noise", presented at this year's European LLVM Conference? > > | Noise is a language extension that allows a programmer to create > custom optimization > | strategies and apply them to specific code segments. This enables > fine-grained control > | over the

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Chandler, >>> >>> What changes are you planning to make? >>>

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 29 May 2013 09:28, <Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just wanted to bump this discussion in case anyone had any more > comments > > to make. > > > > We're in a bit of a bind here as we've now had requests for this feature > > from 10 separate customers, s...

Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > Hi, > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.devel/28958 for > the previous discussion), how...