search for: bulldoze

...1.2011, at 08:33, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jan, > >> if I compile with dragonegg and -march=native I get this message: >> 'bdver1' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) > > this is coming directly from LLVM which doesn't know about bulldozer yet. > >> Is there any plan to support this cpu ? > > I don't know. Hopefully someone who knows something about this will comment. I added a basic description for bdver1 and bdver2 in r145493. LLVM doesn't know many of bulldozer's new instructions though. - Ben &gt...

...ds wrote: > >> Hi Jan, >> >>> if I compile with dragonegg and -march=native I get this message: >>> 'bdver1' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) >> >> this is coming directly from LLVM which doesn't know about bulldozer yet. >> >>> Is there any plan to support this cpu ? >> >> I don't know. Hopefully someone who knows something about this will comment. > > I added a basic description for bdver1 and bdver2 in r145493. > LLVM doesn't know many of bulldozer's new in...

Hi Jan, > if I compile with dragonegg and -march=native I get this message: > 'bdver1' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) this is coming directly from LLVM which doesn't know about bulldozer yet. > Is there any plan to support this cpu ? I don't know. Hopefully someone who knows something about this will comment. Ciao, Duncan. > > > Here the full example the source file doesn't matter. > > gcc -s -static -Wall -O2 -march=native -fplugin=dragonegg.so >...

...elf some XOP merging. - Jan ----- Original Message ----- > From: David A. Greene <greened at obbligato.org> > To: Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at googlemail.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2011 12:19 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] bdver1 cpu(bulldozer) support with dragonegg > > Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at googlemail.com> writes: > >> On 30.11.2011, at 08:33, Duncan Sands wrote: >> >>> Hi Jan, >>> >>>> if I compile with dragonegg and -march=native I get this message: >>>...

Hello, if I compile with dragonegg and -march=native I get this message: 'bdver1' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) Is there any plan to support this cpu ? Here the full example the source file doesn't matter. gcc -s -static -Wall -O2 -march=native -fplugin=dragonegg.so -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns pointer.c -o pointer

...t cs.uiuc.edu, also each patch > should be its own plain-text attachment. > > -Tom > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:22:36PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > Attached files is related to the changes made to add the Schedmodel for > a > > AMD bulldozer target, > > > > Please note that , the model is incomplete but has some of the valuables > > features implemented. > > > > Request to the group or someone from AMD for the comments on the > > implementation. > > > > Thanks > > ~umesh > &gt...

Jan Sjodin <jan_sjodin at yahoo.com> writes: > Better be quick! I am adding FMA4 and XOP now, and if you contribute > code before I do, you can spare yourself some XOP merging. Go ahead. We're not going to get there soon enough. :( -Dave

...odin <jan_sjodin at yahoo.com> > Cc: David A. Greene <greened at obbligato.org>; Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at googlemail.com>; "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2011 2:48 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] bdver1 cpu(bulldozer) support with dragonegg > > Jan Sjodin <jan_sjodin at yahoo.com> writes: > >> Better be quick! I am adding FMA4 and XOP now, and if you contribute >> code before I do, you can spare yourself some XOP merging. > > Go ahead.  We're not going to get there soo...

For a while now we (Cray) have had some very primitive cache structure information encoded into our version of LLVM. Given the more complex memory structures introduced by Bulldozer and various accelerators, it's time to do this Right (tm). So I'm looking for some feedback on a proposed design. The goal of this work is to provide Passes with useful information such as cache sizes, resource sharing arrangements, etc. so that they may do transformations to improve mem...

Dear Andrew and the Group, I’m trying come up with a SchedMachineModel for the AMD bulldozer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture). The model is not exist for the same .Please correct me if am i wrong here. I was going through your reference @ https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Target/TargetSchedule.td . But I couldn’t model some of...

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:40 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > For a while now we (Cray) have had some very primitive cache structure > information encoded into our version of LLVM.  Given the more complex > memory structures introduced by Bulldozer and various accelerators, it's > time to do this Right (tm). > > So I'm looking for some feedback on a proposed design. > > The goal of this work is to provide Passes with useful information such > as cache sizes, resource sharing arrangements, etc. so that they may do &g...

Dear All, Attached files is related to the changes made to add the Schedmodel for a AMD bulldozer target, Please note that , the model is incomplete but has some of the valuables features implemented. Request to the group or someone from AMD for the comments on the implementation. Thanks ~umesh On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com>wrote: &gt...

If you haven't found it yet, the last public AMD Software Optimization Guide for Family 15h is here: http://developer.amd.com/wordpress/media/2012/03/47414_15h_sw_opt_guide.pdf This one describes both Bulldozer and Piledriver processors. Chapter 2 will given an overview of the Microarchitecture and Appendix B gives some additional details on which pipes are used for where. I haven't yet looked in detail at your patch to check your model, but at minimum the comments, references and naming still all...

...mail has the old patch file. Please have look at the attached patch file herewith,which has the latest changes. i'm new to llvm testing framework and cross compilation as such ,Please can you through some lights like references etc ,Which states that how can i cross compile the llvm for Bulldozer and run the performance test against my changes.So that i can tune for a better result. Thanks ~Umesh On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Mike Vermeulen <mevermeulen at gmail.com>wrote: > If you haven't found it yet, the last public AMD Software Optimization > Guide for Family...

...ething if I delete agp from conf file in both cases? Another issue bothers me also. RC version of amdtemp failed to read temperatures on 8120. What version will be included in release? Some months ago there was a post of people taking source from current and compiling mo- dule. It worked on 8 core bulldozer. Best regards all Zoran

...David Greene Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 18:41 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Memory Subsystem Representation For a while now we (Cray) have had some very primitive cache structure information encoded into our version of LLVM. Given the more complex memory structures introduced by Bulldozer and various accelerators, it's time to do this Right (tm). So I'm looking for some feedback on a proposed design. The goal of this work is to provide Passes with useful information such as cache sizes, resource sharing arrangements, etc. so that they may do transformations to improve mem...

...; > Please have look at the attached patch file herewith,which has the > latest changes. > > i'm new to llvm testing framework and cross compilation as such ,Please > can you through some lights like references etc ,Which states that how can > i cross compile the llvm for Bulldozer and run the performance test > against my changes.So that i can tune for a better result. > > Thanks > ~Umesh > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131122/f2e79087/attachme...

...------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajarshi Guha <rxg218 at psu.edu> <http://jijo.cjb.net> GPG Fingerprint: 0CCA 8EE2 2EEB 25E2 AB04 06F7 1BB9 E634 9B87 56EE ------------------------------------------------------------------- Breadth-first search is the bulldozer of science. -- Randy Goebel

...------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajarshi Guha <rxg218 at psu.edu> <http://jijo.cjb.net> GPG Fingerprint: 0CCA 8EE2 2EEB 25E2 AB04 06F7 1BB9 E634 9B87 56EE ------------------------------------------------------------------- Breadth-first search is the bulldozer of science. -- Randy Goebel

...ect folder. But the user connected to that share can change the rights as well. (this is also not the preferred solution, because nobody knows the creator) 3) Using "directory security mask", "force directory security mode" is not possible with different ALC's, because it bulldoze all permissions for the different ACL's to the same value ... Is there any possibility to prevent users to change rights in this context? Thanks Meike