Displaying 20 results from an estimated 779 matches for "instring".
Did you mean:
nstring
2016 May 24
0
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
Zooming into the command-line option bike-shed:
> On 2016-May-24, at 15:41, Vedant Kumar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> At its core I don't think -fprofile-instr-generate *implies* FE-based instrumentation. So, I'd like to see the driver do this (on all platforms):
>
> * -fprofile-instr-generate: IR instrumentation
> *
2016 May 24
1
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <
dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
> Zooming into the command-line option bike-shed:
>
> > On 2016-May-24, at 15:41, Vedant Kumar via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > At its core I don't think -fprofile-instr-generate *implies* FE-based
> instrumentation. So, I'd like
2015 Feb 10
3
[LLVMdev] Coverage mapping issue: Malformed profile data
Hi all!
It seems I came across on issue with coverage mapping
(http://www.llvm.org/docs/CoverageMappingFormat.html)
check on:
llvm revision: r228136
clang Last Changed Rev: 228121
build: Debug+Asserts
OS: ubuntu 14.04
Here is simple snippets
test1.c: NOT OK
==================
#include <stdio.h>
static int foo() { return 42; }
int main() {
return 0;
}
==================
cp src/test1.c
2016 Jun 27
2
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:44 AM Eric Christopher via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016, 6:41 PM Xinliang David Li via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Sounds fine to me, though I am not a fan of using unstable in the option.
>> I think a more meaningful way (that capture the essence of the
2016 Jun 03
2
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This also means that if the consensus is that -fprofile-instr-generate should really change its meaning to mean IRPGO, I’m open to having this internal patch on our side.
>
> Yeah, it sounds like someone is going to have to keep a "private patch" to change the default. At that point
2016 Mar 09
3
PGO question
Hi,
I have a question regarding PGO.
I collected profile data with the instrumentation build
(-fprofile-instr-generate) and provided for PGO optimization in the second
build (with -fprofile-instr-use=xxx.profdata). This works fine.
Then I tried to provide the profile data to opt using the option
-pgo-instr-use, but this causes an error with the message: "Not an IR level
instrumentation
2008 Apr 26
0
[LLVMdev] ParamAttr Patch - Alignment fix
On Apr 26, 2008, at 17:41, Anders Johnsen wrote:
> Hi Gordon,
>
> Thanks a lot for the feedback. I can see I've been way to
> concentrated on how
> llvm is build, then on this particular patch. I've done the changes
> you have
> suggested and it's now a lot nicer and cleaner!
>
> Please do say, if there is anything else.
Nice. Just a few small
2016 May 24
6
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
> On May 23, 2016, at 8:56 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:23 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jake and I have been integrating IRPGO on PS4, and we've identified 3 remaining work items.
>
> Sean, thanks for the write up. It matches very well with what we think as well.
+ 1
> - Driver
2017 Jul 31
0
[PATCH v11 03/10] daemon: utils: New functions unix_canonical_path, utf16le_to_utf8 and tests.
These utility functions will be used in the OCaml inspection code.
---
daemon/daemon_utils_tests.ml | 15 +++++++
daemon/utils.ml | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
daemon/utils.mli | 12 ++++++
3 files changed, 127 insertions(+)
diff --git a/daemon/daemon_utils_tests.ml b/daemon/daemon_utils_tests.ml
index 892509d89..b1f02de30 100644
---
2016 Jun 27
2
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:53 PM Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
wrote:
> There is some misunderstanding about the intention of this flag. The
> purpose of the flag is not to turn on profile instrumentation (which
> already has -fprofile-instr-generate or -fprofile-generate for it), but to
> select which instrumentors to use for PGO (IR or FE). I prefer fewer flags
2016 Jun 03
5
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:10 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com> wrote:
2008 Apr 26
2
[LLVMdev] ParamAttr Patch - Alignment fix
Hi Gordon,
Thanks a lot for the feedback. I can see I've been way to concentrated on how
llvm is build, then on this particular patch. I've done the changes you have
suggested and it's now a lot nicer and cleaner!
Please do say, if there is anything else.
Anders Johnsen
On Saturday 26 April 2008 22:02:45 Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> Hi Anders,
>
> Thanks for the patch.
2016 Jun 27
0
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
There is some misunderstanding about the intention of this flag. The
purpose of the flag is not to turn on profile instrumentation (which
already has -fprofile-instr-generate or -fprofile-generate for it), but to
select which instrumentors to use for PGO (IR or FE). I prefer fewer flags
too, but sharing flags for completely different purpose does not seem like
the right thing to do.
David
On
2011 Mar 10
2
using lapply
I have a function with the follow signare:
apply.strategy(instr, strat)
where instr and strat are both objects of classes instrument and strategy
respectively.
I want to apply this function to a list that holds objects of the class
instrument.
Currently I am doing this by explicit looping:
for(i in length(instr.list) ) {
apply.strategy(instr.list[[i]], my.strat)
}
Is it possible to
2016 Jun 13
2
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
Quick update. I've gotten derailed from posting a patch for this due to
focusing on higher priority PGO inlining work. No ETA.
-- Sean Silva
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:30
2016 Jun 23
0
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016, 6:41 PM Xinliang David Li via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:10 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at
2016 Jun 02
4
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:10 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Frédéric Riss <friss at apple.com <mailto:friss at apple.com>> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 1, 2016, at 1:46 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com <mailto:chisophugis at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On
2006 Jun 27
3
Possible to get a definition of a function from a package to use without invoking the package?
Hi,
I often use the mod() and instring() functions that are available in the
clim.pact package. This package has a lot of dependencies, including
installation of netCDF, and I haven't yet been able to get
library(clim.pact) to work on a Mac OS 10.4.6. A previous request for
help with the Mac problem yielded no results, so now I wo...
2008 Apr 26
2
[LLVMdev] ParamAttr Patch - Alignment fix
On Sunday 27 April 2008 00:48:00 Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2008, at 17:41, Anders Johnsen wrote:
> > Hi Gordon,
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback. I can see I've been way to
> > concentrated on how
> > llvm is build, then on this particular patch. I've done the changes
> > you have
> > suggested and it's now a lot nicer and
2016 Jun 27
0
The state of IRPGO (3 remaining work items)
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Dean Michael Berris <dberris at google.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:53 PM Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> There is some misunderstanding about the intention of this flag. The
>> purpose of the flag is not to turn on profile instrumentation (which
>> already has