search for: mingx

...here doing things > like field-sensitivity always increase precision, which is not true for C. > > If you really want to attempt this, I would suggest using one of the > demand driven context-sensitive approaches that will be easy to fit in CFL. > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:57 AM Mingxing Zhang <james0zan at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello John, >> >> I've finished the first version of my proposal on enhancing alias >> analysis. >> The proposal can be downloaded at >> http://james0zan.github.io/resource/GSoC15-Proposal-AA.pdf. &g...

...sal-AA.pdf. I hope I've successfully justified the necessity and benefits of this project. If possible, please find some time to review it and give me some more feedbacks. Thank you very much! P.S. I'm working on the other proposal, a couple of days is needed. On 8 March 2015 at 21:42, Mingxing Zhang <james0zan at gmail.com> wrote: > Got it. > I'll try to find the applications for field-sensitivity (and > interprocedural, etc) AA analysis. > And I'll do some preliminary evaluation on the tracing/slicing part for > the bloat detection. > > Thanks! &gt...

On 3/8/15 8:56 AM, Mingxing Zhang wrote: > Hello John, > > According to the FAQ, I can submit two proposals although at most one > of them can be accepted. > Thus I will prepare a proposal for each of the two projects. Correct. Only one proposal will be accepted. > And, after reading the code of cfl-...

Wow, that is cool! I'll check about it. Thank you! On 4 March 2015 at 21:57, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/4/15 2:18 AM, Mingxing Zhang wrote: > > Hello John, > > Thank you for your advices and congratulations~ > > I'll read the code of cfl-aa and Giri first and make the decision of which > project to pursue. > The choice will be reported to this thread once I made the determination > (hopefu...

...om a function called by A() looks > opaque). > > If you want to take a stab at making IPA better/adding context > sensitivity, you're more than welcome to do so. I'm happy to work on other > things in the meantime :) > > George > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Mingxing Zhang <james0zan at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello Daniel, >> >> Thank you for your comments and sorry for my mistakes, I'll revise them. >> And I'll for sure read the paper you mentioned and survey the recent >> researches before deciding the im...

...#39;ll read the code of cfl-aa and Giri first and make the decision of which project to pursue. The choice will be reported to this thread once I made the determination (hopefully within this week). Thanks! On 3 March 2015 at 23:12, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Mingxing, > > I think both projects are interesting and useful. > > Points-to analysis is something that is needed by research users of LLVM, > but to the best of my knowledge, no solid implementation currently exists > (although the cfl-aa work being done at Google may provide us with...

...d proposal on gist <https://gist.github.com/james0zan/d03737c60b10d0d11d34> and give me some feedbacks? P.S. I do prefer the bloat detection tool, but I'm not sure about whether it is suitable for GSoC. Thus I will apply for the Alias Analysis one if it is not suitable. Thanks! -- Mingxing Zhang Tel.: +86-10-62797143 Web: http://james0zan.github.io/ Addr: Room 3-122, FIT Building, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150303/88cc67e8/atta...

Mingxing Tan wrote: > > Hi, all; > > How can I get the number of variables in a function/module (both the > number of variables in original source program and the number of > temporal variables for ssa-form)? > Do you want the SSA values *created* by a function, those used by a fu...

Hi, all; How can I get the number of variables in a function/module (both the number of variables in original source program and the number of temporal variables for ssa-form)? I’m dealing with some dataflow analysis problem and need the information of variables. Appreciate any help. Thanks. Star.Tan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Mingxing, Your project sounds interesting and if it significantly improves over the live variable analysis that is in LLVM right now, I think it could be a useful contribution. I'm copying the 'llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu' mailing list, which you should join. Send all related messages to...

Hi Star Tan, Thanks for the very interesting perf analyses. Star Tan wrote: > We can see the "Combine redundant instructions" are invoked many times and the > extra invoke resulted by Polly's canonicalization is the most significant > one. We have found this problem before and I need to look into the details of > canonicalization passes related to "Combine

...cution time regression. So we need to further refine Polly's optimization. At least we should avoid the performance regression. In the next step, I will evaluate those polly canonicalization passes without -polly-codegen-scev to understand their compile-time and execution-time impact. Best, Mingxing At 2013-09-14 09:51:10,"Star Tan" <tanmx_star at yeah.net> wrote: Hello all, I have evaluated the compile-time and execution-time performance of Polly canonicalization passes. Details can be referred to http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/recent_activity. There are fo...

Dear all, Following the Benchmarking BOF from 2013 US dev meeting, I’d like to propose some improvements to the LNT performance tracking software. The most significant issue with current implementation is that the report is filled with extremely noisy values. Hence it is hard to notice performance improvements or regressions. After investigation of LNT and the LLVM test suite, I propose

At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> >> I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. > >Interesting. > >>

Hello all, I have evaluated the compile-time and execution-time performance of Polly canonicalization passes. Details can be referred to http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/recent_activity. There are four runs: pollyBasic (run 45): clang -O3 -Xclang -load -Xclang LLVMPolly.so pollyNoGenSCEV (run 44): clang -O3 -Xclang -load -Xclang LLVMPolly.so -mllvm -polly -mllvm -polly-codegen-scev

At 2013-09-09 13:07:07,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: >> >> At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> >>> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >>> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >>> the