search for: obstack

...to be made, and in particular implementing ovs. This is not more than a couple hundred lines of code, and would speed it up by another few orders of magnitude (as well as reduce memory usage greatly). The main thing blocking this patch, however, is that someone needs to rewrite bitmap.c/bitmap.h, obstack.c and obstack.h, into C++. They are currently just modified versions of what gcc is using. You can get rid of the obstacks, of course. Using set<u32> or BitVector or something like it will result in a slowdown of mammoth proporations, and about a 10x memory increase. Trust me here, you don&...

...ng ovs. This is not more than a couple >hundred lines of > code, and would speed it up by another few orders of >magnitude (as > well as reduce memory usage greatly). > > The main thing blocking this patch, however, is that >someone needs to > rewrite bitmap.c/bitmap.h, obstack.c and obstack.h, into >C++. They > are currently just modified versions of what gcc is >using. > You can get rid of the obstacks, of course. > > Using set<u32> or BitVector or something like it will >result in a > slowdown of mammoth proporations, and about a 10x...

...op/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o bc-emit.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 bc-emit.c /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o bc-optab.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 bc-optab.c /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o obstack.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 obstack.c /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -Wl,-native-cbe -O3 c-parse.o c-lang.o c-lex.o c-pragma.o c-decl.o c-typeck.o c-convert.o c-aux-info.o c-common.o c-iterate.o toplev.o version.o tree.o print-tree.o stor-layout.o...

...g about two separate instances of this problem, both in glibc and something else? I originally saw this in a benchmark (which it may be possible to get changed) and only afterward found the glibc idiom. The most recent glibc code is a bit more complicated than I represented below. If you look up obstack.h you can see what’s there now. Basically, they’re computing a pointer alignment that may be based on some non-null base pointer or may be based on null, depending on the target architecture. I’m sure it’s possible to make it more sensible, but I’ve never interacted with the glibc community so I’...

On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > I suspect that a large reason that LLVM does worst than a native C > compiler with the CBE+GCC is that LLVM generates very low-level C code, > and I'm not convinced that GCC is doing a very good job (ie, without > syntactic loops). Yup, this is EXACTLY what is going on. I took this very simple C function: int Array[1000]; void test(int

...llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o > bc-emit.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 bc-emit.c > /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o > bc-optab.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 bc-optab.c > /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc -c -o > obstack.o -DHOST_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN -O3 obstack.c > /Users/patrick/Desktop/LLVM/cfrontend/ppc/llvm-gcc/bin/gcc > -Wl,-native-cbe -O3 c-parse.o c-lang.o c-lex.o c-pragma.o > c-decl.o c-typeck.o c-convert.o c-aux-info.o c-common.o c-iterate.o > toplev.o version.o tree.o print-tree...

...Support/SupportTests/ThreadPoolTest.AsyncBarrier > LLVM-Unit :: Support/SupportTests/ThreadPoolTest.AsyncBarrierArgs > LLVM-Unit :: Support/SupportTests/ThreadPoolTest.GetFuture > LLVM-Unit :: Support/SupportTests/ThreadPoolTest.PoolDestruction > MemorySanitizer :: Linux/obstack.cc > MemorySanitizer :: Linux/process_vm_readv.cc > MemorySanitizer :: fork.cc > MemorySanitizer :: iconv.cc > MemorySanitizer-Unit :: Msan-x86_64-Test/MemorySanitizer.fgetgrent_r > MemorySanitizer-Unit :: Msan-x86_64-Test/MemorySanitizer.getgrent > MemoryS...

...| 28 ++++++ modules/git-merge-changelog | 2 +- modules/linked-list-tests | 1 - modules/linkedhash-list-tests | 1 - modules/mkdirat-tests | 1 - modules/nonblocking-pipe-tests | 1 - modules/nonblocking-socket-tests | 1 - modules/obstack-printf-tests | 1 - modules/openat-tests | 1 - modules/parse-datetime-tests | 1 - modules/pipe-filter-gi-tests | 1 - modules/pipe-filter-ii-tests | 1 - modules/quotearg-simple-tests | 1 - modules/quotearg-tests |...

...e generated under include directory. So where do > these header files come from? I am concerned for their licenses. if you mean the top level include directory in the llvm-gcc source, there seem to be lots of headers in it: $ ls gcc-4.2.llvm/include/ ansidecl.h dyn-string.h getopt.h obstack.h symcat.h ChangeLog fibheap.h hashtab.h partition.h ternary.h ChangeLog-9103 filenames.h libiberty.h safe-ctype.h xregex2.h COPYING floatformat.h md5.h sort.h xregex.h demangle.h fnmatch.h objalloc.h splay-tree.h xtensa-config.h Best w...

The llvm-gcc front end mingw binary on llvm.org has patched a lot of *.h files under include directory. But when building llvm-gcc on mingw myself, there is no header file generated under include directory. So where do these header files come from? I am concerned for their licenses. Thanks & Regards -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...ame_r_bad_host_name These ^^ tests fail in same fashion as above without the "with-call". MemorySanitizer-Unit :: Msan-x86_64-with-call-Test/MemorySanitizer.getpwent MemorySanitizer-Unit :: Msan-x86_64-with-call-Test/MemorySanitizer.getpwent_r MemorySanitizer-x86_64 :: Linux/obstack.cc MemorySanitizer-x86_64 :: Linux/process_vm_readv.cc MemorySanitizer-x86_64 :: fork.cc MemorySanitizer-x86_64 :: iconv.cc ^^ fail with the new bash redirection alias. Profile-x86_64 :: Linux/coverage_ctors.cpp Profile-x86_64 :: Linux/coverage_dtor.cpp Profile-x86_64 :: L...

...nction.bc gcse.bc genrtl.bc ggc-common.bc global.bc graph.bc haifa-sched.bc hash.bc hashtable.bc hooks.bc ifcvt.bc insn-attrtab.bc insn-emit.bc insn-extract.bc insn-opinit.bc insn-output.bc insn-peep.bc insn-recog.bc integrate.bc intl.bc jump.bc langhooks.bc lcm .bc lists.bc local-alloc.bc loop.bc obstack.bc optabs.bc params.bc predict.bc print-rtl.bc print-tree.bc profile.bc real.bc recog.bc reg-stack.bc regclass.bc regmove.bc regrename.bc reload.bc reload1.bc reorg.bc resource.bc rtl.bc rtlanal.bc rtl-error.bc sbitmap.bc sched-deps.bc sched-ebb.bc sched-rgn.bc sched-vi s.bc sdbout.bc sibcall.bc s...

(cc'ing non-legacy llvm-dev this time; apologies if you get this twice. Please don't reply-all to the first one.) On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > Dear testers, > > Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at > r258223. (It took a little longer than I'd planned, sorry about that.) > > There

Hi everyone, I've got a problem that I would like some input on. The problem basically boils down to a program that I am compiling, whose source I don't control, doing something like this: p = (char*)0 + n where 'n' is an intptr_t-sized value that the program knows is actually a valid address for a pointer. clang translates this as %p = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8*

Hi, I have just tagged 3.7.1-rc1, so it is ready for testing. As a reminder, when doing regression testing, use the 3.7.0 release as your baseline. Thanks, Tom

Hi, I just tagged 3.9.1-rc2, so testing can begin. There was a bug found in -rc1 before I could send out a release announcement, so I decided to merge the fix and tag -rc2 to save some testing cycles. We can always use more testers, so if you are interested in helping, let me know. Thanks, Tom

Hi, There was one problem in -rc1, so we had to do another release candidate. -rc2 has now been tagged and is ready for testing. -Tom