search for: ipo

On 7/17/13 12:35 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > >> 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage >> ==================================== >> >> From 5k' high, the concept is very simple, just to >> step 1).divide the merged IR into small pieces, >> step 2).and compile each of this pieces independendly. >> step 3) the objects of each p...

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 7/17/13 12:35 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage >>> ==================================== >>> >>> From 5k' high, the concept is very simple, just to >>> step 1).divide the merged IR into small pieces, >>> step 2).and compile each of this pieces independendly. >>> step...

...stead. I don't necessarily think your conclusion is wrong, but the patch isn't proving what you think it's proving. In fact, the below passes all tests as well. When you call passes through `opt` they don't end up calling through the createXYZPass path. diff --git a/lib/Transforms/IPO/IPConstantPropagation.cpp b/lib/Transforms/IPO/IPConstantPropagation.cpp index b3ee499..8d70b98 100644 --- a/lib/Transforms/IPO/IPConstantPropagation.cpp +++ b/lib/Transforms/IPO/IPConstantPropagation.cpp @@ -253,7 +253,9 @@ char IPCP::ID = 0; INITIALIZE_PASS(IPCP, "ipconstprop",...

Hi everyone! I have a question about data processing efficiency. My data are as follows: I have a data set on quarterly institutional ownership of equities; some of them have had recent IPOs, some have not (I have a binary flag set). The total dataset size is 700k+ rows. My goal is this: For every quarter since issue for each IPO, I need to find a "matched" firm in the same industry, and close in market cap. So, e.g., for firm X, which had an IPO, i need to find a matche...

The pass is pretty rudimental (as the comment at the top of the file hints), and it seems LLVM already has IPSCCP (which should do a better job at interprocedural constant propagation). I'm also not entirely sure it's used anywhere. Is there any reason to keep it around? Thanks, -- Davide "There are no solved problems; there are only problems that are more or less solved" --

On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Sean: > > I'm sorry I lie. I didn't mean to lie. I did try to avoid making a *BIG* change > to the IPO pass-ordering for now. However, when I make a minor change to > populateLTOPassManager() by separating module-pass and non-module-passes, I > saw quite a few performance difference, most of them are degradations. Attacking > these degradations one by one in a piecemeal manner is wasting...

On 12 July 2013 15:49, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, There: > > This is the proposal for parallelizing post-ipo stage. See the following > for details. > > I also attach a toy-grade rudimentary implementation. This > implementation can be > used to illustrate some concepts here. This patch is not going to be > committed. > > Unfortunately, this weekend I will be too busy to read e...

Andy and I briefly discussed this the other day, we have not yet got chance to list a detailed pass order for the pre- and post- IPO scalar optimizations. This is wish-list in our mind: pre-IPO: based on the ordering he propose, get rid of the inlining (or just inline tiny func), get rid of all loop xforms... post-IPO: get rid of inlining, or maybe we still need it, only perform the inling to to callee whic...

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage > ==================================== > > From 5k' high, the concept is very simple, just to > step 1).divide the merged IR into small pieces, > step 2).and compile each of this pieces independendly. > step 3) the objects of each piece are fed back to linker...

Hi,It seems inliner does not take into account if a call is inside a loop. I'm trying to figure out if loop-info can be made available to the inliner. When I try to add LoopInfoWrapperPass to Inliner.cpp, diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cppindex 568707d..cb51ea8 100644--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// #include "llvm/Transforms/IPO/Inli...

Hi, Sean: I'm sorry I lie. I didn't mean to lie. I did try to avoid making a *BIG* change to the IPO pass-ordering for now. However, when I make a minor change to populateLTOPassManager() by separating module-pass and non-module-passes, I saw quite a few performance difference, most of them are degradations. Attacking these degradations one by one in a piecemeal manner is wasting time. We might...

Hi, we are currently using pppd to connect to the net through pppoe. Some providers seem to propose ipoe instead of pppoe and I cannot find any clue on how/where/if_possible to set up such connection in CentOS. Anybody has any experience with ipoe...? Thx, JD

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > Personally, I think the right approach is to add a bool to > createGlobalDCEPass defaulting to true named something like > IsAfterInlining. In most standard pass pipelines, GlobalDCE runs after > inlining for obvious reasons, so the default makes sense. The special case > is

...in theory. I think it depends on the definition of > performance. If performance means execution-time, I guess it dose not. > However, if performance includes code-size, I think it may have some negative impact. > Following is few scenario: > > - constants generated by the post-IPO passes are not shared across partitions > - dead func may be detected during the post-IPO stage, and they may not be deleted. In don't know if it's feasible, but stable linker output, independent of the partioning, is highly desirable. One of the most irritating performance regression...

...me piece of work. One issue I ran into that I was hoping for some clarification. Nominally, I had started out by performing code generation from the AST into a function that was added to the current module. I then ran a PassManager on that module to optimize the function -- this included several IPO passes (the entire list from -O3 for opt, in fact). I ran the optimizer after each function was generated. I found that when I tried to execute functions via the JIT, I got unexpected and incorrect results -- for example, calling Invoke on a function would execute the wrong function. The only s...

...; <tr> <td width="100%" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <p class="MsoBodyText" align="center"><b><font color="#003399" size="4" face="Verdana">Help Beta Test Our Site and Be Eligible to Purchase Shares of Future IPOs In Which We Participate**</font></b></p> <p class="MsoBodyText" align="left" style="text-align:left"><font size="2" face="Arial">eMedsecurities has selected you as a possible participant to help test our online stock-...

...; <tr> <td width="100%" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <p class="MsoBodyText" align="center"><b><font color="#003399" size="4" face="Verdana">Help Beta Test Our Site and Be Eligible to Purchase Shares of Future IPOs In Which We Participate**</font></b></p> <p class="MsoBodyText" align="left" style="text-align:left"><font size="2" face="Arial">eMedsecurities has selected you as a possible participant to help test our online stock-...

Hi, There: This is the proposal for parallelizing post-ipo stage. See the following for details. I also attach a toy-grade rudimentary implementation. This implementation can be used to illustrate some concepts here. This patch is not going to be committed. Unfortunately, this weekend I will be too busy to read emails. Please do not construe de...

...or operator<< (and short-circuits all the stream operations) On Sep 15, 2017 2:21 PM, "Adam Nemet via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: For better readability we typically create remarks and call OptimizationRemarkEmitter::emit unconditionally. E.g.: Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp: ORE.emit(OptimizationRemarkMissed(DEBUG_TYPE, "TooCostly", Call) Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp- << NV("Callee", Callee) << " not inlined into " Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp- << NV("Caller", Caller) <<...

...ev wrote: > Hi, > It seems inliner does not take into account if a call is inside a > loop. I'm trying to figure out if loop-info can be made available to > the inliner. > > When I try to add LoopInfoWrapperPass to Inliner.cpp, > > > diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp > b/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp > index 568707d..cb51ea8 100644 > --- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp > +++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Inliner.cpp > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// >...