Displaying 16 results from an estimated 16 matches for "lsbits".
2012 Apr 05
1
[PATCH] remove unnecesary typedef in bitwriter.c
...lock(FLAC__BitWriter *bw, const FL
msbits = uval >> parameter;
#if 0 /* OPT: can remove this special case if it doesn't make up for the extra compare (doesn't make a statistically significant difference with msvc or gcc/x86) */
- if(bw->bits && bw->bits + msbits + lsbits <= FLAC__BITS_PER_WORD) { /* i.e. if the whole thing fits in the current bwword */
- /* ^^^ if bw->bits is 0 then we may have filled the buffer and have no free bwword to work in */
+ if(bw->bits && bw->bits + msbits + lsbits <= FLAC__BITS_PER_WORD) { /* i.e. if the whole...
2012 May 10
0
[LLVMdev] MC Hammer Test results
Hello everyone
At EuroLLVM I presented some testing work we have been doing on improving
correctness of the MC Layer for ARM. There seemed to be interest from the
community in seeing the results of this test suite.
Background
-----------
We are using a test suite, called MC Hammer, that compares MC with an ARM
in-house implementation of the same functionality. The test space for this suite
is
2011 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] Avoiding load narrowing in DAGCombiner
...h emit between 1 and O(10) SDValues,
depending on alignment information), and then runs DAGCombine. To lower
an i16 STORE that is known to be in the high-addressed 2 bytes of a word
on my little-endian target, I emit and LD4 from the word-aligned address
and an SRL 16 to shift the i16 into the LSbits of the register.
DAGCombine visit()s an ISD::SRL node and notices that it is
right-shifting the result of an LD4 from %arrayidx4 by 16 bits, and
replaces it with an LD2 from %arrayidx+2.
Replaces
--------
0x17f7070: i32,ch = load 0x17faa00, 0x17f7f70, 0x17f6a70<LD4[%arrayidx4]>
0x17f94c0:...
2008 Mar 26
0
[LLVMdev] use-diet design?
...pointer to an array from the
User object and
there may be a variable number of them.
Layout a) will be modelled by prepending the User object by the Use[]
array.
...---.---.---.---.-------...
| 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | User
```---`---`---`---`-------```
12 12 12 12
a bit-encoding in the 2 LSBits of the Use::Val will allow to find the
start of the User object:
00 --> binary digit 0
01 --> binary digit 1
10 --> stop and calc (s)
11 --> full stop (S)
Given a Use*, all we have to do is walk till we get a
stop and we either have a User immediately behind or
we have to walk to the...
2012 Mar 07
2
[LLVMdev] "Machine LICM" for Constants?
Hi All,
I work on a backend for a target similar to Mips, where large
immediates are loaded into registers with 2 instructions, 1 to load the
MSBits and 1 to load the LSBits. I've noticed a recurring pattern
where, despite low register pressure, these constants will be
rematerialized in every iteration of a loop, rather than being hoisted.
Here's an example using the mips-unknown-unknown target and Clang/LLVM
HEAD. From newlib's implementation of str...
2011 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] Avoiding load narrowing in DAGCombiner
...and O(10) SDValues,
> depending on alignment information), and then runs DAGCombine. To lower
> an i16 STORE that is known to be in the high-addressed 2 bytes of a word
> on my little-endian target, I emit and LD4 from the word-aligned address
> and an SRL 16 to shift the i16 into the LSbits of the register.
>
> DAGCombine visit()s an ISD::SRL node and notices that it is
> right-shifting the result of an LD4 from %arrayidx4 by 16 bits, and
> replaces it with an LD2 from %arrayidx+2.
>
> Replaces
> --------
> 0x17f7070: i32,ch = load 0x17faa00, 0x17f7f70, 0x17f6a...
2011 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] Avoiding load narrowing in DAGCombiner
...ues,
>> depending on alignment information), and then runs DAGCombine. To lower
>> an i16 STORE that is known to be in the high-addressed 2 bytes of a word
>> on my little-endian target, I emit and LD4 from the word-aligned address
>> and an SRL 16 to shift the i16 into the LSbits of the register.
>>
>> DAGCombine visit()s an ISD::SRL node and notices that it is
>> right-shifting the result of an LD4 from %arrayidx4 by 16 bits, and
>> replaces it with an LD2 from %arrayidx+2.
>>
>> Replaces
>> --------
>> 0x17f7070: i32,ch = lo...
2012 Mar 07
0
[LLVMdev] "Machine LICM" for Constants?
...ode for a target like ARM or X86 as a comparison.
Evan
On Mar 7, 2012, at 10:38 AM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> Hi All,
> I work on a backend for a target similar to Mips, where large
> immediates are loaded into registers with 2 instructions, 1 to load the
> MSBits and 1 to load the LSBits. I've noticed a recurring pattern
> where, despite low register pressure, these constants will be
> rematerialized in every iteration of a loop, rather than being hoisted.
> Here's an example using the mips-unknown-unknown target and Clang/LLVM
> HEAD. From newlib's i...
2011 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] Avoiding load narrowing in DAGCombiner
...; depending on alignment information), and then runs DAGCombine. To lower
>>> an i16 STORE that is known to be in the high-addressed 2 bytes of a word
>>> on my little-endian target, I emit and LD4 from the word-aligned address
>>> and an SRL 16 to shift the i16 into the LSbits of the register.
>>>
>>> DAGCombine visit()s an ISD::SRL node and notices that it is
>>> right-shifting the result of an LD4 from %arrayidx4 by 16 bits, and
>>> replaces it with an LD2 from %arrayidx+2.
>>>
>>> Replaces
>>> --------
>...
2012 Mar 08
1
[LLVMdev] "Machine LICM" for Constants?
...comparison.
>
> Evan
>
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 10:38 AM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> I work on a backend for a target similar to Mips, where large
>> immediates are loaded into registers with 2 instructions, 1 to load the
>> MSBits and 1 to load the LSBits. I've noticed a recurring pattern
>> where, despite low register pressure, these constants will be
>> rematerialized in every iteration of a loop, rather than being hoisted.
>> Here's an example using the mips-unknown-unknown target and Clang/LLVM
>> HEAD. From new...
2009 May 03
2
[LLVMdev] PointerIntPair causing trouble
On 3 Mai, 18:56, Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.dut... at rapidmind.com>
wrote:
> On 1-May-09, at 8:35 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> > I still don't understand why this is a problem, but I decreased the
> > default to 2 bits. Please verify that this helps,
>
> I think I've figured out what's going on, and why no assertions are
> caused by this. It
2015 Dec 28
1
[PATCH 3] for bitwriter.c
..._WORD_ALL_ONES is not 32-bit, so better to replace it with the
proper 32-bit constant.
5) In FLAC__bitwriter_write_rice_signed_block() the new variable total_bits
was added (just as in FLAC__bitwriter_write_rice_signed()). The code was
simplified. Example:
- bw->bits = bw->bits + msbits + lsbits;
+ bw->bits += total_bits;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 3_bitwriter.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4007 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/attachments/20151228/5fab8c38/attachment.obj
2004 Aug 06
1
vorbiscomments in speexenc
Hi,
The Speex reference refers to the Vorbis comment format to define the
comment header:
http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html
However, speexenc violates that format in a couple of ways:
1. it doesn't append a "framing bit" to the end of the
comments packet. According to the Vorbis comment spec,
an ERROR must be flagged when decoding such a
2009 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] PointerIntPair causing trouble
Hi Gabor,
On 3-May-09, at 4:57 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:
> Your analysis is perfectly correct. I Was AFK for the last two days,
> so I couldn't
> tell you this same story.
Thanks, glad I was on the right track :).
> The algorithm relies on the fact that the LSBit of the first "pointer"
> in User
> is zero. This is normally the case with VPtrs, which are
2009 May 03
0
[LLVMdev] PointerIntPair causing trouble
On 1-May-09, at 8:35 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> I still don't understand why this is a problem, but I decreased the
> default to 2 bits. Please verify that this helps,
I think I've figured out what's going on, and why no assertions are
caused by this. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with User*
pointer alignment per se (although I believe that could still
2009 May 02
2
[LLVMdev] PointerIntPair causing trouble
On May 1, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Stefanus Du Toit wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Looks like Preston and I have found the cause of the problem. The
> issue is with PointerLikeTypeTraits<T*>::NumLowBitsAvailable. This
> is set to 3, which basically assumes that unless the traits are
> specialized for a particular pointer type, objects of that type are
> allocated with