Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "dacc".
Did you mean:
dac
2009 Nov 15
5
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
Hi all,
LLVM is built without debug enabled. Also i am not forcing lli to use
interpreter mode. so i dont think the reason is not because of debug build
or interpreter mode.
*step 1: *
compiled the 3 files (generic_replica.c ,xacc.c and dacc.c) with clang-cc to
llvm bytecode files using -emit-llvm-bc and (-O0/-O3) options
*step 2:*
bytecode obtained from step 1 (generic_replica.bc, xacc.bc and dacc.bc) is
passed to opt tool using (-O0/-O3) options
*step 3:*
optimized bytecode obtained from step 2 (generic_replica.opt.bc, xacc.opt.bc
an...
2009 Nov 15
0
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
...l.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> LLVM is built without debug enabled. Also i am not forcing lli to use
> interpreter mode. so i dont think the reason is not because of debug build
> or interpreter mode.
>
>
> *step 1: *
> compiled the 3 files (generic_replica.c ,xacc.c and dacc.c) with clang-cc
> to llvm bytecode files using -emit-llvm-bc and (-O0/-O3) options
> *step 2:*
> bytecode obtained from step 1 (generic_replica.bc, xacc.bc and dacc.bc) is
> passed to opt tool using (-O0/-O3) options
> *step 3:*
> optimized bytecode obtained from step 2 (generic_...
2009 Nov 14
0
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
He is probably using the interpreter on a debug build.
Evan
On Nov 14, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com>
wrote:
>>
>> for -O3 results refer attachment.
>> time clang (-
>> O0) llvm-gcc(-O0)
>> gcc(-O0)
>> real
>> 0m10.247s
2009 Nov 14
2
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
>
> for -O3 results refer attachment.
> time clang (-O0) llvm-gcc(-O0) gcc(-O0)
> real 0m10.247s 0m11.324s 0m10.963s
> user 0m2.644s 0m2.478s 0m2.263s
2014 Apr 16
2
ID mapping
We use Samba 3.6.23 with an LDAP backend. After migrating to a new virtual
server with same RHEL 6.5 as the physical server it replaced, everything
works fine, except that sometimes the winbind mapping gets confused (I
hesitate to say "corrupted"). Here's an real-life example I finally
managed to capture, with the domain SID redacted:
# wbinfo -U 1503
S-1-5-21-xxx-xxx-xxx-3244
#
2009 Nov 14
2
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
...d short a;
} RGB;
struct {
unsigned short u;
unsigned short v;
unsigned short y;
unsigned short a;
} YUV;
} GenefxAccumulator;
extern void Xacc_blend_invsrccolor( int , GenefxAccumulator* , GenefxAccumulator , GenefxAccumulator* );
extern void Dacc_premultiply( int , GenefxAccumulator* );
GenefxAccumulator D[ACC_SIZE] =
{
{ 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x4 },
{ 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x5 },
{ 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x6 },
{ 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x7 },
{ 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x8 },
{ 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x9 },
{ 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0xa },
{ 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xb },
{ 0x8, 0x9, 0xa, 0xc }...
2009 Nov 14
0
[LLVMdev] Very slow performance of lli on x86
...d short a;
} RGB;
struct {
unsigned short u;
unsigned short v;
unsigned short y;
unsigned short a;
} YUV;
} GenefxAccumulator;
extern void Xacc_blend_invsrccolor( int , GenefxAccumulator* , GenefxAccumulator , GenefxAccumulator* );
extern void Dacc_premultiply( int , GenefxAccumulator* );
GenefxAccumulator D[ACC_SIZE] =
{
{ 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x4 },
{ 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x5 },
{ 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x6 },
{ 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x7 },
{ 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x8 },
{ 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x9 },
{ 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0xa },
{ 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xb },
{ 0x8, 0x9, 0xa, 0xc }...