search for: lencod

...e/Applications/oggenc/oggenc jit /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc cbe /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc ^^ no idea what's causing these jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod/ldecod ^^ weird jit codegen problem produces wrong FP output, PR963 llc /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod cbe /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod ^^ no idea jit /MultiSource/Applications/obsequi/Obsequi ^^ no idea cbe /MultiSource/Benchmarks/Prolangs-C/archie-client/archie ^^ cbe doesn't support inline asm (bzero lowering) jit /M...

...it /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc TEST-FAIL: cbe /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc * Not sure, difference in binary output. TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod/ldecod * Weird JIT problem, there's a PR filed on this. TEST-FAIL: llc /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod TEST-FAIL: cbe /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod * Not sure, difference in numerical output TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/obsequi/Obsequi * Note sure. TEST-FAIL: cbe /MultiSource/Benchmarks/Prolangs-C/archie-...

I created the 1.9 release branch last night. As a reminder, please do not check in any code changes to the release branch. Please send me email if you have changes that need to be merged into the release branch. To check out the release branch: cvs -d <CVS Repository> co -r release_19 llvm cvs -d <CVS Repository> co -r release_19 llvm-test cvs -d <CVS Repository> co -r

...ance Regressions Δ Previous Current σ > MultiSource/Applications/aha/aha.exec 12.07% 3.5424 3.9698 0.0002 > MultiSource/Benchmarks/VersaBench/bmm/bmm.exec 11.38% 2.2970 2.5585 0.0007 > External/SPEC/CFP2000/179_art/179_art.exec 10.95% 1.4190 1.5744 0.0013 > MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod.exec 6.81% 11.8149 12.6195 0.0267 > External/SPEC/CINT2006/458_sjeng/458_sjeng.exec 5.72% 6.0263 6.3711 0.0076 > MultiSource/Benchmarks/mafft/pairlocalalign.exec 3.98% 29.8022 30.9869 0.0810 > MultiSource/Benchmarks/Fhourstones-3_1/fhourstones3_1.exec 3.88% 2.0729 2.1534 > 0.0010...

...e/Applications/hexxagon/hexxagon TEST-FAIL: llc /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc TEST-FAIL: cbe /MultiSource/Applications/oggenc/oggenc TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod/ldecod TEST-FAIL: llc /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod TEST-FAIL: cbe /MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/obsequi/Obsequi TEST-FAIL: llc /MultiSource/Applications/kimwitu++/kc TEST-FAIL: jit /MultiSource/Applications/kimwitu++/kc TEST-FAIL:...

LLVMers, The LLVM 1.9 Prerelease is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.9/ If anyone can spare some time, please download the appropriate tarballs for your platform and test the release (at least with make check). I'd also appreciate any documentation reviews. Please note that llvm-gcc3 on x86 may not have a clean dejagnu run. You should see one XPASS for

Hi Andrew, > No. Duncan suggested that he could hitch a ride with us through France. The problem is, we're not driving to Spain at all and there doesn't appear to be any place to transfer. > > The point is, you're not going to be able to leverage most of a CFG-based optimizing compiler if don't use the CFG to express control flow. when Chris first came up with his

...complete regardless of whether we support exceptions. This isn't the first time I've heard the small block fallacy. I'll try to give a quick data point. I suppressed basic block merging and hacked SimplifyCFG to split blocks at all call sites. Then I looked at the impact on 403.gcc and lencod at -O3. This is all I had time for. It looks like the aggressive block splitting did have a small impact on compile time. Up to 10% for some passes. Much of the overhead is in isel, which doesn't make sense to me. We should get a speedup, but we may be suffering from extra DAG bloat for the co...

...s/2/graph?test.15=2> -1.55% 6.8155 6.7102 0.0081 CTMark/mafft/pairlocalalign <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.1=2> -1.05% 8.0407 7.9559 0.0193 CTMark/ClamAV/clamscan <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.7=2> -1.02% 11.3893 11.2734 0.0081 CTMark/lencod/lencod <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.10=2> -1.01% 12.8763 12.7461 0.0244 CTMark/SPASS/SPASS <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.5=2> -1.01% 12.5048 12.3791 0.0340 Performance Improvements - Compile Time Δ Previous Current σ External/SPEC/CI...

...gt; gisel gisel+greedy > CTMark/7zip/7zip-benchmark 102.8% 106.5% > CTMark/Bullet/bullet 100.5% 105.1% > CTMark/ClamAV/clamscan 101.6% 130.8% > CTMark/SPASS/SPASS 101.2% 120.0% > CTMark/consumer-typeset/consumer-typeset 105.7% 138.2% > CTMark/kimwitu++/kc 103.1% 122.6% > CTMark/lencod/lencod 106.2% 143.4% > CTMark/mafft/pairlocalalign 96.2% 135.4% > CTMark/sqlite3/sqlite3 109.1% 155.1% > CTMark/tramp3d-v4/tramp3d-v4 109.1% 132.0% > GEOMEAN 103.5% 128.0% > > > Thanks, > > Kristof Thanks, -Quentin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attac...

...ojects/test-suite/MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod/ldecod *Part of the report .txt file for libcalls* Name | total | #exit | MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod/ldecod | * | * | MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod | * | * | MultiSource/Applications/sqlite3/sqlite3 | * | * | MultiSource/Applications/SIBsim4/SIBsim4 | * | * | MultiSource/Applications/siod/siod | * | * | *And the raw file for lib...

...Δ Previous Current σ >> MultiSource/Applications/aha/aha.exec 12.07% 3.5424 3.9698 0.0002 >> MultiSource/Benchmarks/VersaBench/bmm/bmm.exec 11.38% 2.2970 2.5585 0.0007 >> External/SPEC/CFP2000/179_art/179_art.exec 10.95% 1.4190 1.5744 0.0013 >> MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod.exec 6.81% 11.8149 12.6195 0.0267 >> External/SPEC/CINT2006/458_sjeng/458_sjeng.exec 5.72% 6.0263 6.3711 0.0076 >> MultiSource/Benchmarks/mafft/pairlocalalign.exec 3.98% 29.8022 30.9869 0.0810 >> MultiSource/Benchmarks/Fhourstones-3_1/fhourstones3_1.exec 3.88% 2.0729 2.1534...

...mark I can get some >> figures. >> > I normally use 403.gcc, but if you don't have SPEC sources, these tests in the nightly test suite take a while to compile: > > MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV > MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod > MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod > MultiSource/Applications/SPASS > MultiSource/Applications/kimwitu++/kc > MultiSource/Applications/sqlite3/sqlite3 > > If you run 'make TEST=nightly', both llc and opt compile times are interesting. The runtime of opt is cryptically reported in the GCCAS column. > > /j...

...P2006/450.soplex/Output/450.soplex -2.2% External/SPEC/CINT2000/186.crafty/Output/186.crafty -2.2% SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++/Output/stepanov_container -2.1% External/SPEC/CINT2006/456.hmmer/Output/456.hmmer -2.1% External/SPEC/CINT2000/254.gap/Output/254.gap -2.0% MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/Output/lencod -2.0% MultiSource/Benchmarks/FreeBench/pifft/Output/pifft -1.9% External/SPEC/CFP2006/447.dealII/Output/447.dealII -1.9% External/SPEC/CINT2006/401.bzip2/Output/401.bzip2 -1.9% External/SPEC/CINT2006/464.h264ref/Output/464.h264ref -1.9% MultiSource/Applications/SPASS/Output/SPASS -1.8...

...> # of expected passes 2533 >> # of expected failures 6 >> >> >> -bw > > Looks good. > > <report.nightly.txt> >> _______________________________________________ > > Not so good, there are things failing that usually pass: lencod, > oggenc, a bunch of EH tests. > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

...s/CoyoteBench/fftbench -2.05% 0.7280 0.7131 0.0049 MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/NodeSplitting-dbl/NodeSplitting-dbl -1.96% 3.1494 3.0878 0.0034 SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/oourafft -1.70% 3.4625 3.4035 0.0009 SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/flops -1.31% 7.0775 6.9845 0.0014 MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod -1.12% 4.5972 4.5455 0.0050 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130727/7e6324b0/attachment.html>

Can you share you compile-time and memory footprint measurements at least for CTMark? For a new pass/feature it would be great to share this with the community before you commit. Or did I miss them? Thanks Gerolf > On Jun 27, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Geoff Berry via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > EarlyCSE w/ MemorySSA has been enabled by default as of r306477 >

.../pairlocalalign >> <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.1=2> -1.05% >> 8.0407 7.9559 0.0193 >> CTMark/ClamAV/clamscan >> <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.7=2> -1.02% >> 11.3893 11.2734 0.0081 >> CTMark/lencod/lencod >> <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.10=2> -1.01% >> 12.8763 12.7461 0.0244 >> CTMark/SPASS/SPASS >> <http://michaelsmacmini.local/perf/v4/nts/2/graph?test.5=2> -1.01% >> 12.5048 12.3791 0.0340 >> >> >&gt...

Great! I thought I had to look at our pipeline at O0 to make sure optimized regalloc was supported (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022 <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022> in mind). Glad I was wrong, it saves me some time. > On May 22, 2017, at 12:51 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > >> On 22 May 2017, at 09:09, Diana Picus

...sé Fonseca wrote: >>> >> I normally use 403.gcc, but if you don't have SPEC sources, these tests in the nightly test suite take a while to compile: >> >> MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV >> MultiSource/Applications/JM/ldecod >> MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod >> MultiSource/Applications/SPASS >> MultiSource/Applications/kimwitu++/kc >> MultiSource/Applications/sqlite3/sqlite3 >> >> If you run 'make TEST=nightly', both llc and opt compile times are interesting. The runtime of opt is cryptically reported in the GCCAS...