search for: holistically

Hello, I would like to submit two papers that use LLVM to the Related Publications section. Both papers focus on code isolation applied to perform piecewise compiler optimizations. The code isolation process is performed by CERE, an open source tool based on LLVM. The second paper is an extended version of the first one. 1) Piecewise Holistic Autotuning of Compiler and Runtime Parameters

Dear Mihail, I've added these two publications to the publications page. Please review it and let me know if I need to make any changes. In particular, if you have URLs to use for the papers, having those would be greatly appreciated. Regards, John Criswell On 11/28/17 12:05 PM, Mihail Popov via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to submit two papers that use LLVM

On Thu, 2023-09-21 at 20:08 -0400, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > I have heard in the past that rsyncing an empty dir over a tree to > delete the tree is faster than an rm -rf but I can't say I have ever > benchmarked it to get any actual numbers. This **may** indeed be a myth (for a long time now) re-cited again and again and - could no longer be valid today - could apply only

On Jul 27, 2010, at 4:59 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy wrote: > >> Keeping it out of the mid-level optimizers is "by design". When we tackle this, we should do it right, by making the flags per-instruction. >> > But at least ist it planned for some time in the future? > then i can "survive" with a patch until then. As an open source project, we have little

Hey All, Curious about the best, easy to use virtualization management platform for small labs of 30-40 physical servers. Looking for something that's relatively simple to operate, install and lightweight but with enough maturity to provide monitoring as well as holistic views of the entire physical space etc. Hearing of oVirt, Xen and Eucalyptus to name a few but wondering what other

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: > Kyle Moffett wrote: >> Even in the 64-bit-integer on 32-bit-CPU case, you still end up with >> the lower 32-bits in a standard integer GPR, and it's trivial to just >> ignore the "upper" register. You also would not need to do any kind >> of bit-shift, so long as your inline

Hello, I run into a situation where I need to provide the library functions, such as sqrt() from <math.h> and rand() from <stdlib.h>, in the format of LLVM IR bitcode files. Then I can try to link the bitcode of my program against these library bitcode files to formulate a holistic bitcode file. However, these library functions are only available in object format. And the source

> As an open source project, we have little ability to force things to happen. It could be implemented next week or it might be 10 years from now, or never. All I can say is that I don't know of anyone planning to work on it. It dovetails with rounding mode support, so a holistic approach would be good. > All I want to know if it "is planned" or if it is wrong use and

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Christopher Jefferson < chris at bubblescope.net> wrote: > > 3) Optimize quickly or '-O1' > > - Attribute: quickopt (this would be a new attribute) > > - Goal: Perform basic optimizations to improve both performance and > simplicity of the code, but perform them *quickly*. > > This level is all about compile time, but in a

On 14 Jan 2013 09:10, "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > > This has been an idea floating around in my head for a while and after several discussions with others it continues to hold up so I thought I would mail it out. Sorry for cross posting to both lists, but this is an issue that would significantly impact both LLVM and Clang. > > > 3) Optimize

I had intended to come back to this but because I didn't really think I had anything to add to the discussion I put it at a low enough priority that I forgot about it. But I saw your bug report and was surprised to see that I was already unhelpful on this topic but because that original poster didn't have access to do an rm while you are trying to get a performance boost. I have

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:21 AM, James Dennett <james.dennett at gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote: > > On 2012-06-15 07:25, Chandler Carruth wrote: > >> Figured it was good to ask this as James is busy making sure the Clang > >> doxygen is actually all well formed, and reasonably linked together so

So I decided to do a quick test using the Linux kernel source tree since it has lots of files. I duplicated a tree, used 'find . -type f -exec chmod 444 {} +' to make read only files for rsync to want to chmod, then used cp -al to make several duplicate trees using hard linked files. An rm -rf on one such tree took .97 seconds while an rsync deletion took 1.25 seconds. Clearly I

I don't think my view is of interest to many, so offlist. I reject this: " I would consider data analysis work to be three stages: data preparation, statistical analysis, and producing the report." For example, there is no such thing as "outliers" -- data to be removed as part of cleaning/preparation -- without a statistical model to be an "outlier" **from**,

This has been an idea floating around in my head for a while and after several discussions with others it continues to hold up so I thought I would mail it out. Sorry for cross posting to both lists, but this is an issue that would significantly impact both LLVM and Clang. Essentially, LLVM provides canned optimization "levels" for frontends to re-use. This is nothing new. However, we

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote: > On 2012-06-15 07:25, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> Figured it was good to ask this as James is busy making sure the Clang >> doxygen is actually all well formed, and reasonably linked together so >> we have proper docs for the ever growing number of Clang library users... >> >> There are

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com>, "via llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Xinliang David Li" <davidxl at google.com> > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:54:36 PM

On Jul 26, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: On Jul 26, 2010, at 2:52 PMPDT, Jochen Wilhelmy wrote: >>> Currently we don't do any unsafe-math opts in InstCombine. Not >>> sure if this is policy or if it's just that nobody's implemented it. >>> >> perhaps in can be implemented using the existing flag -enable-unsafe- >> fp-math. >>

> Keeping it out of the mid-level optimizers is "by design". When we tackle this, we should do it right, by making the flags per-instruction. > But at least ist it planned for some time in the future? then i can "survive" with a patch until then. I wonder why these optimizations can be done in the mid-level and additionaly in the backend. as a non-compiler-guru i

Engines 1.1.4, featuring compatibility with Rails 1.1.6 Secure Edition (TM), includes a number of synergising technologies designed to optimize holistic action-items and e-enable visionary solutions. Point your preferred *SVN* client at http://svn.rails-engines.org/engines/tags/rel_1.1.4 or syndicate a turn-key zeitgeist via *script/plugin* script/plugin install -f engines to literally