search for: mem2

...print(paste("Mem1", memory.size())) for (i in 1:30) { eval(parse(text="temp <- matrix1[10,]")) eval(parse(text="matrix1[10,] <- temp * 0")) } print(paste("Mem2", memory.size())) })) print (paste("Time:", system.time(funcExample())[1], "secs")) if (sum(matrix1) == 11999800) { print ("OK") } else { print ("NOT OK") } } main() [1] "OK" [1] "Mem1 99.32" [1] "Mem2...

...else. I meant to say that it looks like the semantics of ObjectSizeMin(X) is that "return the conservative minimum object size for all values that X may take at runtime" (resp. ObjectSizeMax(X)). For instance this: void i(int c, volatile int* sink) { void* mem1 = malloc(20); void* mem2 = malloc(40); *sink = __builtin_object_size(c ? mem1 : mem2, 0); *sink = __builtin_object_size(c ? mem1 : mem2, 2); } is lowered to movl $40, (%rsi) movl $20, (%rsi) ret by GCC. Applying the same logic to malloc(N), since it returns a location that has N deref...

...spx_word16_t *x1, @ const spx_word16_t *x2, @ const spx_word16_t *a, @ spx_word16_t *y, @ int N, @ int M, @ spx_word32_t *mem1, @ spx_word32_t *mem2, @ char *stack) .global qmf_synth qmf_synth: stmdb sp!, { r4-r11, lr } add r7, sp, #36 @ r0 = x1, r1 = x2, r2 = a, r3 = y ldmia r7, { r4-r7 } @ r4 = N, r5 = M, r6 = mem1, r7 = mem2 add r8, r4, r5 sub r9, sp,...

...it. What we need is predication at > the expression tree leaves, which is why we're talking about loads and > stores. For loads, there is no %oldvalue so we don't have to worry > about it. > > %ra = ... > if (%mask) { > %rb = [mem1] > } > else { > %rb = [mem2] > } > %rc = %ra + %rb > > Would be translated to: > > %ra = ... > > %rt = load [mem1], %mask > %rf = load [mem2], ~%mask > > %rb = select %mask, %rt, %rf > %rc = fadd %ra, %rb > > Since the input select defined all vector elements we don't need selects...

...in which memory the array should be allocated. This allows the backend to map the load and store instructions from and to this array on the right target instructions, depending on the memory used. For example: __attribute__((address_space(1))) char mem1[100]; __attribute__((address_space(2))) char mem2[100]; Now, we are using a function which reads a value from one of these memories and does some processing. Since we want to execute this function for multiple memories, we make it accept a pointer in the generic address space (ie, no address space attribute): void do_stuff(char* mem); Somewhe...

...----------------------- struct { T1* p1, T2 *p2, int xyz} mydata; addr1 = phi(&mydata, &mydata); // all operands have same value. addr2 = phi(&mydata.xyz, &mydata.xyz); memcpy(addr1, ... sizeof(mydata)) // mem1 = load addr2->syz // mem2 -------------------------------------------------------- ( But for the phi node, getUnderlyingObject() would return "mydata" as "object" for both memory accesses. ) getObjectSize(mem2) return 4 instead of sizeof(mydata). Now that the "object" only have 4 bytes,...

...gt; struct { T1* p1, T2 *p2, int xyz} mydata; > > addr1 = phi(&mydata, &mydata); // all operands have same value. > addr2 = phi(&mydata.xyz, &mydata.xyz); > > memcpy(addr1, ... sizeof(mydata)) // mem1 > = load addr2->syz // mem2 > -------------------------------------------------------- > > ( But for the phi node, getUnderlyingObject() would return "mydata" as "object" for both memory accesses. ) > getObjectSize(mem2) return 4 instead of sizeof(mydata). Now that the "object" only...

I'm trying to understand how predicated/masked instructions can be generated in llvm, specifically an instruction where a set bit in the mask will write the new result into the corresponding vector lane in the destination and a clear bit will cause the lane in the destination to remain what it was before the instruction executed. I've seen a few places that suggest 'select' is the

Hi George, Have you considered changing our existing behavior to match GCC's builtin_object_size instead of adding a new parameter? That may be simpler overall. There's also a clear upgrade strategy -- fold every old style call to "<min> ? 0 : 1". You probably already know this, but GCC folds builtin_object_size(0, 0) to -1 and builtin_object_size(0, 2) to 0. We'll

On Feb 27, 2013, at 4:05 AM, Nuno Lopes <nunoplopes at sapo.pt> wrote: > Hi, > > Regarding the definition of object for @llvm.objectsize, it is identical to gcc's __builtin_object_size(). So it's not wrong; it's just the way it was defined to be. > > Regarding the BasicAA's usage of these functions, I'm unsure. It seems to me that isObjectSmallerThan()

...2, int xyz} mydata; >> >> addr1 = phi(&mydata, &mydata); // all operands have same value. >> addr2 = phi(&mydata.xyz, &mydata.xyz); >> >> memcpy(addr1, ... sizeof(mydata)) // mem1 >> = load addr2->syz // mem2 >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ( But for the phi node, getUnderlyingObject() would return "mydata" as "object" for both memory accesses. ) >> getObjectSize(mem2) return 4 instead of sizeof(mydata). Now that the "o...

Got my first round of IP500s in today. Anybody have any example sip.cfg files they'd like to share? Tim Jackson Network Engineer Angelina County, Texas (936)639-4827 office (936)414-6723 mobile -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20040928/a923e094/attachment.htm

...p..ASLC.....h. 7a60: 70 69 41 4c 53 49 70 01 41 53 4c 43 a1 03 a4 01 piALSIp.ASLC.... 7a70: 70 01 41 53 4c 45 a4 00 14 17 53 43 49 50 00 a0 p.ASLE....SCIP.. 7a80: 0e 92 93 4f 56 45 52 00 a4 92 47 53 4d 49 a4 00 ...OVER...GSMI.. 7a90: 5b 82 4e 04 5e 5e 4d 45 4d 32 08 5f 48 49 44 0c [.N.^^MEM2._HID. 7aa0: 41 d0 0c 01 08 5f 55 49 44 0a 02 08 43 52 53 5f A...._UID...CRS_ 7ab0: 11 1d 0a 1a 86 09 00 01 00 00 00 20 00 00 20 00 ........... .. . 7ac0: 86 09 00 01 00 00 00 40 00 00 20 00 79 00 14 11 ....... at .. .y... 7ad0: 5f 43 52 53 00 a0 0a 49 47 44 53 a4 43 52 53 5f _CRS...IGDS...