search for: katya_romanova

Hello, I have several low priority UBSan questions... (1) Is there a way for UBSan to print its output to a file that the user specified (e.g. via option) instead of dumping everything on stderr? (2) Out of curiosity, why is the name of the option for printing the stacktrace spelled "UBSAN_OPTIONS=print_stacktrace=1", though the allowed value is 1? Since the only one value is

...gt; build the graph and prune all unreachable code. > > > All of these problems seem surmountable, but in aggregate, they make > me strongly doubt that the benefit is worth the cost. > > -Chandler > > > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Romanova, Katya > <Katya_Romanova at playstation.sony.com > <mailto:Katya_Romanova at playstation.sony.com>> wrote: > > Hello, > > I encountered a problem triggered by Jump-Threading optimization. > This pass is creating an unreachable block with an instruction > that is not well form...

Hello, I encountered a problem triggered by Jump-Threading optimization. This pass is creating an unreachable block with an instruction that is not well formed, which then causes the subsequent GVN pass to enter an infinite loop. I have submitted a bug report and proposed fix to llvm-commits. This bug opened a can of worms. I was asked to move the discussion to llvm-dev to reach for a wider

Hello, LLVM generates two additional instructions for 128->256 bit typecasts (e.g. _mm256_castsi128_si256()) to clear out the upper 128 bits of YMM register corresponding to source XMM register. vxorps xmm2,xmm2,xmm2 vinsertf128 ymm0,ymm2,xmm0,0x0 Most of the industry-standard C/C++ compilers (GCC, Intel's compiler, Visual Studio compiler) don't generate any extra moves

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com> > To: "Katya Romanova" <Katya_Romanova at playstation.sony.com>, "Nick Lewycky" <nlewycky at google.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Rafael > Espindola" <rafael_espindola at playstat...

On 24 February 2015 at 02:05, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Will try to reply to the larger thread again soon, but a quick reply on a > bit of a tangent... > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: >> >> 2. Should unreachable code be allowed to contain nonsense (like >> instructions that depend on

I will be out of the office starting 10/28/2011 and will not return until 11/07/2011. I will respond to your message when I return. If you need assistance, please contact my manager, Sidney Hummert.

Is there a reason why the alignment of the .text section should be 4 when we are optimizing for size (-Os or -Oz)? Note that when are optimizing for size, the symbols inside .text section don't have any alignment constraints. Alignment=4 for .text with the unaligned symbols inside this section prevent our linker from de-duplicating functions. Could the alignment of the .text section be