search for: jpaquett

...run at -O1 too since clang is creating the TargetMachine with CodeGenOpt::Default for -O1. --Sumanth G -----Original Message----- From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 12:37 PM To: Sumanth Gundapaneni <sgundapa at codeaurora.org> Cc: jpaquette at apple.com; LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVMTargetMachine with optimization level passed from clang. > On Jan 6, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > getOptLevel() gets the leve...

...h either "Default", "None" or "Aggressive". Threre is no correspondence for "Less". This boils down to , if I pass "-O1", the Target Machine is created with CodeGenOpt::Default. I am available on IRC @ sgundapa. -----Original Message----- From: jpaquette at apple.com [mailto:jpaquette at apple.com] Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 12:24 PM To: sgundapa at codeaurora.org Cc: LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVMTargetMachine with optimization level passed from clang. Most of the stuff you’re looking for li...

Hi Jessica, This time I'm replying all.... On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > I would personally like a feature like that in FileCheck because it would > make it a lot easier to write MachineOutliner tests, and would make the > tests significantly smaller and easier to understand. > How do MachineOutliner tests accomplish this now? C...

...ood example of a test that would benefit from this sort of thing. - Jessica > On May 4, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Joel E. Denny <jdenny.ornl at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jessica, > > This time I'm replying all.... > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com <mailto:jpaquette at apple.com>> wrote: > I would personally like a feature like that in FileCheck because it would make it a lot easier to write MachineOutliner tests, and would make the tests significantly smaller and easier to understand. > > How do MachineOutlin...

...> Mehdi > > > > > > --Sumanth G > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 12:37 PM > > To: Sumanth Gundapaneni <sgundapa at codeaurora.org> > > Cc: jpaquette at apple.com; LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVMTargetMachine with optimization level passed > from clang. > > > > > >> On Jan 6, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev <llvm- > dev at lists.llvm.org&g...

...potential for further features. This trade off is the same made for quite a few IR level optimizations, including inlining. As for the worry about code size regressions, so far the results seem to support our hypothesis. Thanks, River Riddle On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi River, > > I’m working on the MachineOutliner pass at the MIR level. Working at the > IR level sounds interesting! It also seems like our algorithms are similar. > I was thinking of taking the suffix array route with the MachineOutliner in > the...

...he outliner enabled for AArch64 and > didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m > curious about what’s going on here... > > I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. > > - Jessica > >> On Apr 23, 2018, at 1:41 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com >> <mailto:jpaquette at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Eli, >> >>> I just tried some tests, and I'm seeing a bunch of failures on SPEC >>> at -O3; looks like mostly crashes at runtime.   I can try to reduce >>> a testcase...

> On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:24 AM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > >> The two passes are pretty different in their approaches to congruency finding, so I don't think it helps to group them as though they were interchangeable "outliner technology". The two passes might be totally orthogonal. > > I think that...

Hi All, Could anyone please give your suggestions on how to generate/get Code Size of each test in LLVM TEST Suite. Thanks & Regards, Ramakota Reddy. IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person,

I just ran SPEC at -O3 with the outliner enabled for AArch64 and didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m curious about what’s going on here... I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. - Jessica > On Apr 23, 2018, at 1:41 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Eli, > >> I just tried some tests, and I'm seeing a bunch of failures on SPEC at -O3; looks like mostly crashes at runtime. I can try to reduce a testcase if you need it. > If you could do that, that would be great. Our testing has been prim...

...assumption correct? Do you think there's some tuning we can do in the machine outliner to tailor for performance improvements? Graham Yiu LLVM Compiler Development IBM Toronto Software Lab Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-407/8200/Markham Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com From: Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Date: 08/15/2017 02:45 PM Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Enhance Partial Inliner by using a general outlining scheme for cold blocks Sent by: jpaquette at apple.com Hi Graham, Have you looked a...

Hi All, I have made some changes in AArch64LoadStoreOptimizer.cpp file and with check-llvm all tests are passing successfully. But in llvm-test suite some tests are failing, like consumer-typeset tests are failing. Now I want to debug with 'consumer-typeset' exe from SANDBOX. But it is release build. How can I debug this issue in this case and how can I get 'consumer-typeset'

...bled for AArch64 and didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m curious about what’s going on here... >> >> I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. >> >> - Jessica >> >>> On Apr 23, 2018, at 1:41 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com <mailto:jpaquette at apple.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Eli, >>> >>>> I just tried some tests, and I'm seeing a bunch of failures on SPEC at -O3; looks like mostly crashes at runtime. I can try to reduce a testcase if you need it. &gt...

...ize, I wanted to point out that an IR approach is not as a clear >> win as you describe and would thus deserve more discussion. >> >> Cheers, >> -Quentin >> >> Thanks, >> River Riddle >> >> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi River, >>> >>> I’m working on the MachineOutliner pass at the MIR level. Working at the >>> IR level sounds interesting! It also seems like our algorithms are similar. >>> I was thinking of t...

I want the optimization to be turned on at -O1 and above. In my case, it is a target independent back-end pass. (Eg: MachinePipeliner) On 2017-01-04 18:10, Mehdi Amini wrote: >> On Jan 4, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> I see the BackendUtil.cpp of Clang creates the TargetMachine with >> the

...08/15/2017 02:45:06 >> PM---Hi Graham, Have you looked at using the existing outline]Jessica >> Paquette ---08/15/2017 02:45:06 PM---Hi Graham, Have you looked at using >> the existing outliner framework to implement partial inlining? I >> >> From: Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> >> To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> >> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> Date: 08/15/2017 02:45 PM >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Enhance Partial Inliner by using a general >> outlining scheme for cold blocks >> Sent by: jpaquette at...

Hi Eli, > I just tried some tests, and I'm seeing a bunch of failures on SPEC at -O3; looks like mostly crashes at runtime. I can try to reduce a testcase if you need it. If you could do that, that would be great. Our testing has been primarily for -Oz and -O2, so I haven’t looked at -O3 at all. > I don't think this is really the right approach. With LTO, you can have a mix of

...s in general :). > > To summarize, I wanted to point out that an IR approach is not as a clear > win as you describe and would thus deserve more discussion. > > Cheers, > -Quentin > > Thanks, > River Riddle > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> > wrote: > >> >> Hi River, >> >> I’m working on the MachineOutliner pass at the MIR level. Working at the >> IR level sounds interesting! It also seems like our algorithms are similar. >> I was thinking of taking the suffix array route wit...

One place to look might be in the MachineOutliner target hooks in X86InstrInfo and AArch64InstrInfo. The MachineOutliner runs extremely late in the pass pipeline so it might be a good place to look for some inspiration. Of course, because this is *extremely late* it might not do *exactly* what you need. (e.g, this is post-register allocation, post frame-lowering, etc.) - Jessica > On May 4,

I would personally like a feature like that in FileCheck because it would make it a lot easier to write MachineOutliner tests, and would make the tests significantly smaller and easier to understand. - Jessica > On May 4, 2018, at 8:40 AM, Joel E. Denny via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Using FileCheck, I have not found a way to make a group of