Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "evgenly".
Did you mean:
evenly
2013 Nov 27
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations at -O1?
On 27 November 2013 08:43, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com>wrote:
> Also note that tail merging of calls happens in CodeGen, not in
> SimplifyCFG.
>
Hi Evgenly,
What we need is the general information that we want to avoid too much code
motion, from choosing the passes, to choosing steps on the passes, to
lowering code differently.
On the front-end layer, It's as simple as dealing -O levels.
On the middle-end, we could have front-ends to set a flag...
2013 Nov 27
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations at -O1?
...Nov 27, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 27 November 2013 08:43, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Also note that tail merging of calls happens in CodeGen, not in
>> SimplifyCFG.
>
>
> Hi Evgenly,
>
> What we need is the general information that we want to avoid too much code
> motion, from choosing the passes, to choosing steps on the passes, to
> lowering code differently.
>
> On the front-end layer, It's as simple as dealing -O levels.
>
> On the middle-end, w...
2013 Nov 27
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations at -O1?
Reid,
by the other CFG simplification, do you mean this case in
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2214?
1: if (x < 0)
2: if (y < 0)
3: do_something();
Yes, this is only bad for MSan (and probably for sampling-based PGO,
but that's a whole different story). But the current version of D2214
disables this optimization at SimplifyUncondBranch() point, which also
covers
2013 Nov 26
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations at -O1?
On 26 November 2013 16:59, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> I'd support disabling tail merging of calls at -O1. The other CFG
> simplification doesn't seem like that big of a deal though for general
> debugging, though.
>
So, do we have two ways of running SimplifyCFG? One for O1 and one for O2+,
and selectively disabling parts of it?
--renato
--------------
2013 Nov 27
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling certain optimizations at -O1?
...olin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
> > On 27 November 2013 08:43, Evgeniy Stepanov
> <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Also note that tail merging of calls happens in CodeGen, not in
> >> SimplifyCFG.
> >
> >
> > Hi Evgenly,
> >
> > What we need is the general information that we want to avoid too much
> code
> > motion, from choosing the passes, to choosing steps on the passes, to
> > lowering code differently.
> >
> > On the front-end layer, It's as simple as dealing -O lev...
2013 Mar 25
86
[PATCH 00/28] libxl: ocaml: improve the bindings
The following series of patches fill in most of the gaps in the OCaml bindings
to libxl, to make them useful for clients such as xapi/xenopsd (from XCP).
There are a number of bugfixes to the existing bindings as well. I have an
experimental version of xenopsd that successfully uses the new bindings.
An earlier version of the first half of the series was submitted to the last
by Ian Campbell on