search for: arrayval

I won't pretend I really understand what's going on here. I've CC'd this message to Chris since he might have a better idea. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733297 In this bug, it appears that the event log callback goes out of scope and is garbage collected. (This is despite the fact we registered it as a global root). When we invoke the callback later,

...y. You said that scalarRepl gets shy about loads and stores of the entire aggregate. Then I use a test case: ; ModuleID = 'test1.ll' define i32 @fun(i32* nocapture %X, i32 %i) nounwind uwtable readonly { %stackArray = alloca <4 x i32> %XC = bitcast i32* %X to <4 x i32>* %arrayVal = load <4 x i32>* %XC store <4 x i32> %arrayVal, <4 x i32>* %stackArray %arrayVal1 = load <4 x i32>* %stackArray %1 = extractelement <4 x i32> %arrayVal1, i32 1 ret i32 %1 } $ opt -S -stats -scalarrepl test1.ll ; ModuleID = 'test1.ll' define i32 @fun(...

...about loads and stores of the entire > aggregate. Then I use a test case: > > ; ModuleID = 'test1.ll' > define i32 @fun(i32* nocapture %X, i32 %i) nounwind uwtable readonly { > %stackArray = alloca <4 x i32> > %XC = bitcast i32* %X to <4 x i32>* > %arrayVal = load <4 x i32>* %XC > store <4 x i32> %arrayVal, <4 x i32>* %stackArray > %arrayVal1 = load <4 x i32>* %stackArray > %1 = extractelement <4 x i32> %arrayVal1, i32 1 > ret i32 %1 > } > > $ opt -S -stats -scalarrepl test1.ll > ; Modu...

...> + /// pointer values is inherently unstable. > > This makes perfect sense. > > It should, as the comment was copied verbatim from FoldingSetNodeID :) > + /// Add an ArrayRef of arbitrary data. > + template<typename T> > + GeneralHash& add(ArrayRef<T> ArrayVal) { > + addBits(ArrayVal.begin(), ArrayVal.end()); > + return *this; > + } > > Doesn't this have the same host-specificity problem, except that it will > cause things that *are* stable to vary, such as arrays of char, or is the > alignment check enough? > > I th...

...h using sizes and endianness that + /// depend on the host. It doesn't matter however, because hashing on + /// pointer values is inherently unstable. This makes perfect sense. + /// Add an ArrayRef of arbitrary data. + template<typename T> + GeneralHash& add(ArrayRef<T> ArrayVal) { + addBits(ArrayVal.begin(), ArrayVal.end()); + return *this; + } Doesn't this have the same host-specificity problem, except that it will cause things that *are* stable to vary, such as arrays of char, or is the alignment check enough? + /// Add a float + GeneralHash& add(floa...

On Feb 18, 2012, at 1:11 AM, Talin wrote: > + /// Add an ArrayRef of arbitrary data. > + template<typename T> > + GeneralHash& add(ArrayRef<T> ArrayVal) { > + addBits(ArrayVal.begin(), ArrayVal.end()); > + return *this; > + } > > Doesn't this have the same host-specificity problem, except that it will cause things that *are* stable to vary, such as arrays of char, or is the alignment check enough? > > I thought ab...

On Mar 10, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Fan Dawei wrote: > Hi all, > > I want to use scalarrepl pass to eliminate the allocation of mat_alloc which is of type [4 x <4 x float>] in the following program. > > $cat test.ll > > ; ModuleID = 'test.ll' > > define void @main(<4 x float>* %inArg, <4 x float>* %outArg, [4 x <4 x float>]* %constants)

OK here's a patch with the latest, including unit tests. I've also tried to make the comments clear that this is intended for the case of "generic" key types, where you are either hashing multiple data types together, or you don't know in advance what the data type will be - for cases such as strings where a tailored algorithm is available, you should use that instead of

Hi all, I want to use scalarrepl pass to eliminate the allocation of mat_alloc which is of type [4 x <4 x float>] in the following program. $cat test.ll ; ModuleID = 'test.ll' define void @main(<4 x float>* %inArg, <4 x float>* %outArg, [4 x <4 x float>]* %constants) nounwind { entry: %inArg1 = load <4 x float>* %inArg %mat_alloc = alloca [4 x <4 x

Allow Guestfs.t handle to be garbage collected, and add a regression test.