search for: fariborz

On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:53 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > >> >> Building llvm is failing for me today. I am using clang++ to build >> (which has not changed). >> >> llvm[2]: Compiling EDMain.cpp for Debug+Asserts build (PIC) >> EDMain.cpp:267:39: error: C-style cast from '::EDTokenVisitor_t'...

...#39;s a frustrating aspect of the test-suite Makefiles. I don't know how to work around it without removing the test from your tree. Is any body trying to figure out why test failed. It is a serious regression lying out bitfields. It has been passing with llvm-gcc until today's failure. - Fariborz > -Andy > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Fariborz, On May 6, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > > On May 6, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > >> On May 6, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Jay Foad wrote: >> >>> This seems wrong -- if a test fails, it shouldn't stop the whole >>> "make", it...

On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:46 AM, John McCall wrote: >> On Sep 13, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> I compiled with "llvm-gcc -emit-llvm test.c -S -o test.ll". Attached to this >>>> message are the source and the resulting ll output...

...aka 'int (^) (llvm::EDToken *)') is not allowed return ((EDInst*)inst)->visitTokens((llvm::EDTokenVisitor_t)visitor); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 error generated. make[2]: *** [/Volumes/sandbox/llvm/tools/edis/Debug+Asserts/EDMain.o] Error 1 - Fariborz

On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:11 AM, John McCall wrote: > On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: >> > We do emit phis when the semantics aren't defined in terms of memory, > e.g. with expressions that have multiple paths of control flow (like > the > conditional operator or null-checked derived-to-base conversions). But at least for conditional operator...

On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:43 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:11 AM, John McCall wrote: >> On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: >>> >> We do emit phis when the semantics aren't defined in terms of memory, >> e.g. with expressions that have multiple paths of control f...

On May 6, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > Hi, > > I've just tried to run the test-suite, for the first time in ages. It > stops rather abruptly with: > > $ make TEST=nightly report report.html This is a test that Fariborz has been working on with Clang. It is possible that llvm-gcc is expected to fail it, if this is so, the test can be put in an #ifdef __clang__. Fariborz, can you take a look? -Chris > > /home/jay/llvm/local/bin/llvm-gcc > -I/home/jay/llvm/gitobjdir/projects/test-suite/SingleSource/Uni...

Hi Reza, -O4 is the highest level of LLVM optimization that I know of. But, I don't know if it has been tried on Spec2006. IIRC, Dan Gohman has run Spec. tests with LLVM, so he can provide more info. - fariborz On Jul 19, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Reza Yazdani wrote: > Hi, > > What are the best options to compile Spec2006 with LLVM compilers to > get the best performance numbers on x86? > > Has anybody compared LLVM Spec2006 numbers with GCC 4.5 base? > > reza _________________________...

On Jul 22, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > > Building llvm is failing for me today. I am using clang++ to build > (which has not changed). > > llvm[2]: Compiling EDMain.cpp for Debug+Asserts build (PIC) > EDMain.cpp:267:39: error: C-style cast from '::EDTokenVisitor_t' (aka > 'int (^...

Hi, What are the best options to compile Spec2006 with LLVM compilers to get the best performance numbers on x86? Has anybody compared LLVM Spec2006 numbers with GCC 4.5 base? reza -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100719/40cf38a5/attachment.html>

Hi, I've just tried to run the test-suite, for the first time in ages. It stops rather abruptly with: $ make TEST=nightly report report.html /home/jay/llvm/local/bin/llvm-gcc -I/home/jay/llvm/gitobjdir/projects/test-suite/SingleSource/UnitTests -I/home/jay/svn/llvm-project/test-suite/trunk/SingleSource/UnitTests -I/home/jay/git/llvm/projects/test-suite/include -I../../include

...2013, at 11:57 AM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > Dropping opt level should not lead to ABI changes. Otherwise you won't > be able to mix-match O2 and O0 objects either. I was referring to “static functions”. Not that it happens, but something to consider. - Fariborz > > David > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:59 AM, jahanian <fjahanian at apple.com> wrote: >> Wouldn’t implementing this proposal be a red herring? By this I mean, it is >> possible that >> throughout the optimization phases, there is an implied assumption that...

On Sep 21, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > > My question is, is this liable to break something else down the line? > Should it be modified to call the getNamedGlobal method only if it's > an Objective-C property? Is this even the correct method for an > Objective-C property? There is a bigger question here. One invariant that is useful is that there is only a

...By this I mean, it is > possible that > throughout the optimization phases, there is an implied assumption that all > functions > are similarly optimized. An example would be under certain optimization > flag, compiler changes > calling convention of static functions. > > - Fariborz > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net wrote: > > Hi, > > I previously made a proposal for adding a pragma for per-function > optimization level control due to a number of requests from our customers > (See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compil...

...he case of dragonegg, because the SSA conversion is > implicit in how gcc creates the IR it lowers from. Makes sense. However, grep'ing on CreatePHI in clang's CodeGen module I see several places where clang's 'front-end' is doing this. What is the rational for that? - Fariborz > > > John. > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Hello, I have recently been working on scheduling for register pressure and ran into the issue of alias analysis when trying to integrate it with LLVM. Looking at the code it seems that the pre register allocation scheduling doesn't use alias analysis information. On the contrary, post-RA uses it. I'm wondering if there is a good reason for this fact. Indeed, it seems to me that alias

On Sep 13, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> I compiled with "llvm-gcc -emit-llvm test.c -S -o test.ll". Attached to this >> message are the source and the resulting ll output. > > compile with optimization. The llvm-gcc front-end "cheats" and stores/loads all > values to/from memory, avoiding the need to construct phi nodes; instead it lets >

Hi all, I have a patch that would potentially help Objective-C 2. In the "make_decl_llvm()" in llvm-backend.cpp, there is code to search through the already generated global variables. Objective-C goes through this code twice with the same identifier. The first time, is to create meta-data for a "property". The second time is to add a reference to that property into the

On Jan 4, 2009, at 3:44 AM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi LLVM-GCC hackers! > > I have a global variable that I want to mark as "TREE_READONLY" so > that it will become a "constant" in LLVM IR. This is for the new > blocks-related stuff, but that's not necessarily important for this > question. In particular, I want to mark the "block_holder"