search for: paquette

...asy enough... But how do I use the "napredict" argument? Is it intended as an argument to be used in the prcomp line (as suggested in ?prcomp), or is it to be used by itself, to replace NAs in the above site score matrix (which is what I really want to do). Thank you, Alain -- Alain Paquette, Ph.D. alain.paquette at gmail.com Centre d'?tude de la for?t (CEF) Universit? du Qu?bec ? Montr?al www.cef-cfr.ca Projet TRIADE www.projettriade.ca alain.paquette at projettriade.ca

buenas   Por favor me pueden decir como ajusto unos datos con las distribuciones poisson generalizada poisso-pascalgeneralizada conway-maxwell-poisson   no se en que paquette estan   Gracias [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...take the "S" output you say? Because like you, I'd rather put in my paper that I did it using R of course! Does anyone know of a way to get this test out of lda? Or of another R package that does it? Thanks Alain (on peut me r??pondre en fran??ais aussi, ??videmment!) -- Alain Paquette Laboratoire d'??cologie v??g??tale Institut de recherche en biologie v??g??tale Universit?? de Montr??al 4101 rue Sherbrooke Est Montr??al (Qu??bec) H1X 2B2 alain.paquette at umontreal.ca labo (514) 872-8488 fax (514) 872-9406 http://www.irbv.umontreal.ca/francais/personnel/cogliastro-paquett...

...t;r"(z)); } void foo3() {   register long *x asm("x27") = &g1;   register long *y asm("x29") = &g1;   register long *z asm("x30") = &g2;   asm(""::"r"(x),"r"(y),"r"(z)); } -Eli On 4/23/2018 2:37 PM, Jessica Paquette wrote: > I just ran SPEC at -O3 with the outliner enabled for AArch64 and > didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m > curious about what’s going on here... > > I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. > > - Jessica > >> On Apr 2...

...that’s a reasonable thing to do though, I’m fine with that approach. It’d be a less invasive change, and would give us the desired LTO behaviour for free. - Jessica > On Apr 23, 2018, at 1:24 PM, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > On 4/20/2018 7:06 PM, Jessica Paquette via llvm-dev wrote: >> We perform regular testing to ensure the outliner produces correct AArch64 code at -Oz. Tests include the LLVM test suite and standard external test suites such as SPEC. All tests compile and execute. We've also been making sure that the outliner produces debuggable...

I just ran SPEC at -O3 with the outliner enabled for AArch64 and didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m curious about what’s going on here... I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. - Jessica > On Apr 23, 2018, at 1:41 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Eli, > >> I just tried some tests, and I'm seeing a bunch of failures on SPEC at -O3; looks like mostly crashes at runtime. I can try to reduce a testcase if you need it. > If you could do that, that would be great. Our testing...

...r: int: INT_GetPHHandler could not load wprocs.dll err:seh: Unhandled Exception Filter Couldn't start debugger (debugger/winedbg 13673292840) (2)" I would really appreciate it if someone could tell me what this means and how it can be remedied, Thanks a bunch, And have a great day, Justin Paquette

Hi Jessica, This time I'm replying all.... On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > I would personally like a feature like that in FileCheck because it would > make it a lot easier to write MachineOutliner tests, and would make the > tests significantly smaller and easier to understand. > How do MachineOutliner tests accomplish...

...ister long *x asm("x27") = &g1; > register long *y asm("x29") = &g1; > register long *z asm("x30") = &g2; > asm(""::"r"(x),"r"(y),"r"(z)); > } > > -Eli > > On 4/23/2018 2:37 PM, Jessica Paquette wrote: >> I just ran SPEC at -O3 with the outliner enabled for AArch64 and didn’t get any failures on my end. Which flags did you use? I’m curious about what’s going on here... >> >> I used -O3 -mllvm -enable-machine-outliner -arch arm64. >> >> - Jessica >> &g...

...is a pretty good example of a test that would benefit from this sort of thing. - Jessica > On May 4, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Joel E. Denny <jdenny.ornl at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jessica, > > This time I'm replying all.... > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com <mailto:jpaquette at apple.com>> wrote: > I would personally like a feature like that in FileCheck because it would make it a lot easier to write MachineOutliner tests, and would make the tests significantly smaller and easier to understand. > > How do...

Hi everyone, I frequently find that I want to quickly find out which functions have changed the most in size when I compile a program with one version of the compiler and another version of the compiler. Optimization remarks provide deeper insight into what the compiler does to individual functions during the compilation process. A tool based off of remarks would give us the means to say

...chine outliner to tailor for performance improvements? >> >> Graham Yiu >> LLVM Compiler Development >> IBM Toronto Software Lab >> Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-407/8200/Markham >> Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com >> >> [image: Inactive hide details for Jessica Paquette ---08/15/2017 02:45:06 >> PM---Hi Graham, Have you looked at using the existing outline]Jessica >> Paquette ---08/15/2017 02:45:06 PM---Hi Graham, Have you looked at using >> the existing outliner framework to implement partial inlining? I >> >> From: Jessica Paquette...

...gains. Is my assumption correct? Do you think there's some tuning we can do in the machine outliner to tailor for performance improvements? Graham Yiu LLVM Compiler Development IBM Toronto Software Lab Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-407/8200/Markham Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com From: Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Date: 08/15/2017 02:45 PM Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Enhance Partial Inliner by using a general outlining scheme for cold blocks Sent by: jpaquette at apple.com Hi Graham, Have...

...either "Default", "None" or "Aggressive". Threre is no correspondence for "Less". This boils down to , if I pass "-O1", the Target Machine is created with CodeGenOpt::Default. I am available on IRC @ sgundapa. -----Original Message----- From: jpaquette at apple.com [mailto:jpaquette at apple.com] Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 12:24 PM To: sgundapa at codeaurora.org Cc: LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVMTargetMachine with optimization level passed from clang. Most of the stuff you’re looking for liv...

...run at -O1 too since clang is creating the TargetMachine with CodeGenOpt::Default for -O1. --Sumanth G -----Original Message----- From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 12:37 PM To: Sumanth Gundapaneni <sgundapa at codeaurora.org> Cc: jpaquette at apple.com; LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVMTargetMachine with optimization level passed from clang. > On Jan 6, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > getOptLevel() gets the level...

> On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:24 AM, Jessica Paquette <jpaquette at apple.com> wrote: > >> The two passes are pretty different in their approaches to congruency finding, so I don't think it helps to group them as though they were interchangeable "outliner technology". The two passes might be totally orthogonal. > >...

...t large data structres to sink more GEPs' by Haicheng Wu [0.00%/25.00%] https://reviews.llvm.org/D45189 '[MachineOutliner][AArch64] Keep track of functions that use a red zone in AArch64MachineFunctionInfo and use that instead of checking for noredzone in the MachineOutliner' by Jessica Paquette [0.00%/25.00%] https://reviews.llvm.org/D46107 '[AArch64] Codegen for v8.2A dot product intrinsics' by Oliver Stannard [0.00%/12.50%] https://reviews.llvm.org/D45541 '[globalisel] Update GlobalISel emitter to match new representation of extending loads' by Daniel Sanders [0.00%/6.25...

...y to help with this effort. -Aditya ________________________________ From: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv at gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 3:46 PM To: Vedant Kumar Cc: llvm-dev; Reid Kleckner; Aditya K; whitequark at whitequark.org; Teresa Johnson; Duncan P. N. Exon Smith; Jessica Paquette Subject: Re: Status of the function merging pass? On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:52 PM Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com<mailto:vsk at apple.com>> wrote: Hi, I'm interested in finding ways to reduce code size. LLVM's MergeFunctions pass seems like a promising option, and I'm curio...

> On Sep 27, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Jessica Paquette via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> I think that, given previous discussion on the topic, we might want a split >> like this: >> >> (1) Search structure >> >> Suffix tree or suffix a...

...icial. Having a common interface here would be great. (This would be a really interesting way to analyze the overall structure of programs as well.) - Jessica > On Sep 27, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Jessica Paquette via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> I think that, given previous discussion on the topic, we might want a split >> like this: >> >> (1) Search structure >> >> Suffix tree or suffix a...