Displaying 19 results from an estimated 19 matches for "monomorphization".
2009 Mar 26
4
same value in column-->delete
Hi Readers,
I have a question.
I have a large dataset and want to throw away columns that have the same
value in the column itself and I want to know which column this was.
For example
> x<-data.frame(id=c(1,2,3), snp1=c("A","G",
"G"),snp2=c("G","G","G"),snp3=c("G","G","A"))
2010 Aug 28
2
extracting columns
Hi,
Can anybody show me how to extract all columns in my dataset that are
polymorphic? Or phrased in another way I would like to delete all
columns that have no more than one letter in it (that are monomorphic).
Thank you.
Laetitia
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: seqCol.txt
URL:
2016 Mar 30
4
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe the relocation stuff that Rafael is currently working on will
> make this a non-issue (it will make relocation application much friendlier
> for the CPU).
>
I don't think Rafael's patch would make this a non-issue. He's making
scanRelocs to create data, which would reduce the
2016 Mar 30
0
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
I believe the relocation stuff that Rafael is currently working on will
make this a non-issue (it will make relocation application much friendlier
for the CPU).
However, even in the current scheme, since the target is fixed, all the
indirect call sites should be monomorphic and so there shouldn't be much
branch-prediction cost (certainly nothing that would cause 1.8% performance
delta for the
2020 Feb 05
4
[RFC] IRBuilder polymorphism: Templates/virtual
Hi,
The IRBuilder is currently templated over a constant folder, and an
instruction inserter. https://reviews.llvm.org/D73835 proposes to move this
towards using virtual dispatch instead. As this is a larger design change,
I would like to get some feedback on this.
The current templated design of IRBuilder has a couple of problems:
1. It's not possible to share code between use-sites that
2016 Mar 30
2
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
I was wandering how much is the overhead of virtual function calls of
TargetInfo member functions. TargetInfo handles platform-specific details,
and we have target-specific subclasses of that class. The subclasses
override functions defined in TargetInfo.
The TargetInfo member functions are called multiple times for each
relocation. So the cost of virtual function calls may be non-neglible. That
2019 Feb 01
6
Status of the function merging pass?
...ns enabled by default for a while now, and have recently also enabled the use of aliases instead of thunks. Apart from some initial bugs we didn't encounter any significant issues (one minor issue with NVPTX not supporting aliases and having CC restrictions).
As Rust tends to be quite heavy on monomorphization, MergeFuncs can give significant binary size reductions. I don't have any comprehensive numbers, but from checking this on a pet project just now, it reduces final artifact size by 13% and I've seen some similar numbers in the ~10% range quoted before.
So, at least for Rust's use case...
2016 Mar 30
0
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
> On Mar 30, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com <mailto:chisophugis at gmail.com>> wrote:
> I believe the relocation stuff that Rafael is currently working on will make this a non-issue (it will make relocation application much friendlier for the CPU).
2016 Mar 31
0
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe the relocation stuff that Rafael is currently working on will
>> make this a non-issue (it will make relocation application much friendlier
>> for the CPU).
>>
>
> I don't think
2016 Mar 31
2
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe the relocation stuff that Rafael is currently working on will
>>> make
2016 Mar 31
0
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
2015 Jun 01
4
[LLVMdev] RFC: liveoncall parameter attribute
TLDR - I have a runtime which expects to be able to inspect certain
arguments to a function even if that argument isn't used within the
callee itself. DeadArgumentElimination doesn't respect this today. I
want to add an argument that records an argument to a call as live even
if the value is known to be not used in the callee.
My use case
-----------------
What my runtime is doing
2016 Jun 30
1
Entry for llvm.org/ProjectsWithLLVM - Terra programming language
Terra: A low-level counterpart to Lua
By Zach DeVito (http://cs.stanford.edu/~zdevito)
Terra (http://terralang.org/) is a system programming language that is
embedded in and meta-programmed by Lua, which handles details like
conditional compilation, type systems, namespaces, and
templating/function specialization that are normally special
constructs in other languages. Terra code shares
2017 May 25
3
UD and DU chains for LLVM IR before running mem2reg
Hi,
Just had a simple question ,
The use-def and def-use chains provided by llvm::Value class ,
would they work for IR that has not been optimized by the "mem2reg" pass ?
( ie, IR code that contains memory interactions and is not in SSA form yet )
Thanks,
Malhar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
2019 Jan 31
5
Status of the function merging pass?
Hi,
I'm interested in finding ways to reduce code size. LLVM's MergeFunctions pass seems like a promising option, and I'm curious about its status in tree.
Enabling MergeFunctions gives a 1% code size reduction across the entire iOS shared cache (a collection of a few hundred system-critical DSO's). The numbers are even more compelling for Swift code. In fact, the swift compiler
2016 Mar 31
1
LLD: Possible optimization for TargetInfo
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at
2007 May 02
4
Shared Nested Resources
The skinny is that I''m attempting to add "Discussions" as resources
under different resources ("Groups", "Projects", for example) and I''ve
simply hit a roadblock (or two).
Discussions are an association between the "discussable" (Group,
Project, etc.) and a "Topic" so:
class Discussion < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :topic
2017 Jun 12
3
[RFC] Pagerando: Page-granularity code randomization
I could understand a TLB hit if functions that originally happened to
be on the same page were spread across many pages, raising the iTLB
footprint for a given loop, etc. (reduced spatial locality). For
pagerando, since we're splitting on 4k page boundaries and can keep
spatial locality (or attempt to improve it), I'm not sure that TLB
misses will be a large factor. I expect that the
2009 Jan 28
2
t.test in a loop
Hi All,
I've been having a little trouble with creating a loop that will run a a
series of t.tests for inspection,
Below is the code i've tried, and some checks i've looked at.
I've used the get(paste()) idea as i was told previously that the use of the
eval should try and be avoided.
I've run a single syntax to check that my systax is correct and works
without any problems