search for: crossingthreshold

...-pc1 > -17.92% > SingleSource/Benchmarks/Adobe-C++/simple_types_loop_invariant > -8.57% > External/SPEC/CINT2000/253.perlbmk/253.perlbmk > -3.43% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm > -3.36% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/CrossingThresholds-dbl > -1.34% > > +ve for these is bad, -ve is good. So overall looks like a good change, > especially in > simple_types_constant_folding. There may be some alignment issues that can > causing wilder swings than they should, but the results here look...

...tiSource/Benchmarks/Trimaran/enc-pc1/enc-pc1 -17.92% SingleSource/Benchmarks/Adobe-C++/simple_types_loop_invariant -8.57% External/SPEC/CINT2000/253.perlbmk/253.perlbmk -3.43% MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm -3.36% MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/CrossingThresholds-dbl -1.34% +ve for these is bad, -ve is good. So overall looks like a good change, especially in simple_types_constant_folding. There may be some alignment issues that can causing wilder swings than they should, but the results here look good. The list for aarch64 i...

...e=58 It seems their execution-time performance are comparable: Performance Regressions - Execution Time  (ISL over Cloog) MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/ControlFlow-flt/ControlFlow-flt 8.49% MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/StatementReordering-flt/StatementReordering-flt 6.77% MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-flt/CrossingThresholds-flt 2.65% SingleSource/UnitTests/Vectorizer/gcc-loops 2.63% Performance Improvements - Execution Time  (ISL over Cloog) MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/NodeSplitting-flt/NodeSplitting-flt -6.77% MultiSource/Benchmarks/ASC_Sequoia/AMGmk/AMGmk -3.03% However, ISL outperforms Clo...

Example: define i8 @narrow_add(i8 %x, i8 %y) { %x32 = zext i8 %x to i32 %y32 = zext i8 %y to i32 %add = add nsw i32 %x32, %y32 %tr = trunc i32 %add to i8 ret i8 %tr } With no data-layout or with an x86 target where 8-bit integer is in the data-layout, we reduce to: $ ./opt -instcombine narrowadd.ll -S define i8 @narrow_add(i8 %x, i8 %y) { %add = add i8 %x, %y ret i8 %add } But on

Hi all, I've started looking at the GlobalMerge pass, enabled by default on ARM and AArch64. I think we should reconsider that, at least for AArch64. As is, the pass just merges all globals together, in groups of 4KB (AArch64, 128B on ARM). At the time it was enabled, the general thinking was "it's almost free, it doesn't affect performance much, we might as well use it".

...54875|2.167388513| -0.2|10131154868| 0|2.162387173| 0.03|10131154865| 0| |MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/ControlLoops-flt/ControlLoops-flt.test | 40|1.790150659| 6749980181|1.783526288| 0.37| 6749980171| 0|1.786574704| 0.2| 6749980173| 0| |MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/CrossingThresholds-dbl.test| 40| 2.08235624|11637250479|2.082839371| -0.02|11637250478| 0| 2.0841341| -0.09|11637250478| 0| |MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-flt/CrossingThresholds-flt.test| 40|1.513224597| 9567133532|1.509145173| 0.27| 9567133532| 0|1.5058262...

tl;dr in low data situations we don’t look at past information, and that increases the false positive regression rate. We should look at the possibly incorrect recent past runs to fix that. Motivation: LNT’s current regression detection system has false positive rate that is too high to make it useful. With test suites as large as the llvm “test-suite” a single report will show hundreds of

...51.49s this program) nts.MultiSource/Benchmarks/ASC_Sequoia/CrystalMk/CrystalMk.exec > 23. 46.89% cumulative (0.88% - 50.66s this program) nts.MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/ControlFlow-flt/ControlFlow-flt.exec > 24. 47.73% cumulative (0.84% - 48.74s this program) nts.MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/CrossingThresholds-dbl.exec > 25. 48.57% cumulative (0.84% - 48.43s this program) nts.MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/InductionVariable-dbl/InductionVariable-dbl.exec > 26. 49.40% cumulative (0.83% - 47.92s this program) nts.SingleSource/Benchmarks/Polybench/datamining/correlation/correlatio...

...972 0.45625335480408 Applications/lemon/lemon 0.6774 0.6805 0.45763212282255 Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-FFT/telecomm-ff 0.0209 0.021 0.47846889952154 Benchmarks/7zip/7zip-benchmark 5.9521 5.9811 0.48722299692545 Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/Cros 2.6449 2.6578 0.48773110514575 Applications/SPASS/SPASS 5.9442 5.9748 0.51478752397294 Benchmarks/MallocBench/cfrac/cfrac 1.2635 1.2704 0.54610209734862 Benchmarks/Ptrdist/ks/ks 0.7054 0.7117 0.8931...

Andy and I briefly discussed this the other day, we have not yet got chance to list a detailed pass order for the pre- and post- IPO scalar optimizations. This is wish-list in our mind: pre-IPO: based on the ordering he propose, get rid of the inlining (or just inline tiny func), get rid of all loop xforms... post-IPO: get rid of inlining, or maybe we still need it, only

...-pc1 > -17.92% > SingleSource/Benchmarks/Adobe-C++/simple_types_loop_invariant > -8.57% > External/SPEC/CINT2000/253.perlbmk/253.perlbmk > -3.43% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/telecomm-gsm/telecomm-gsm > -3.36% > MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/CrossingThresholds-dbl/CrossingThresholds-dbl > -1.34% > > +ve for these is bad, -ve is good. So overall looks like a good change, > especially in > simple_types_constant_folding. There may be some alignment issues that can > causing wilder swings than they should, but the results here look...