search for: faultmap

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "faultmap".

Did you mean: faultmaps
2016 Jan 21
2
Adding support for self-modifying branches to LLVM?
...e at large scale. I've definitely seen removing a highly predictable branch (in many, many places, some of which are hot) to benefit performance in the 5-10% range. For instance, removing highly predictable branches is the primary motivation of implicit null checking. (http://llvm.org/docs/FaultMaps.html). Where exactly the performance improvement comes from is hard to say, but, empirically, it does matter. (Caveat to above: I have not run an experiment that actually put in the same number of bytes in nops. It's possible the entire benefit I mentioned is code size related, but I do...
2016 Jan 21
3
Adding support for self-modifying branches to LLVM?
...tely seen removing a highly predictable branch (in many, > many places, some of which are hot) to benefit performance in the > 5-10% range. For instance, removing highly predictable branches > is the primary motivation of implicit null checking. > (http://llvm.org/docs/FaultMaps.html). Where exactly the > performance improvement comes from is hard to say, but, > empirically, it does matter. > > (Caveat to above: I have not run an experiment that actually put > in the same number of bytes in nops. It's possible the entire > benefi...
2016 Jan 19
4
Adding support for self-modifying branches to LLVM?
Hi, I’m thinking about using LLVM to implement a limited form of self-modifying code. Before diving into that, I’d like to get some feedback from you all. *The goal:* I’d like to add “optional” code to a program that I can enable at runtime and that has zero (i.e., as close to zero as I can get) overhead when not enabled. *Existing solutions:* Currently, I can guard optional code using a
2015 Oct 19
3
Managed Languages BOF @ Dev Meeting
On 18 Oct 2015, at 23:08, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Supporting only basic block level granularity for "try ranges" may not > be sufficient for Java -- if a basic block has more than one null check > in it then throwing the NullPtrException for the first null check (if > it fails) is semantically different from throwing the
2015 Jul 29
1
[LLVMdev] Error when i am using command make -j4 command in cygwin to compile safecode
...p for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Compiling ExpandPostRAPseudos.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling LoopVectorize.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling IPO.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling DependencyAnalysis.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Compiling FaultMaps.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling InlineAlways.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling ObjCARC.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Compiling GCMetadata.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling InlineSimple.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling ObjCARCA...