search for: proxyapps

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20 matches for "proxyapps".

2018 Apr 26
0
Compare test-suite benchmarks performance complied without TBAA, with default TBAA and with new TBAA struct path
...--| | Test name | Error | |-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------| | MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.test | different output | | MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C/SimpleMOC/SimpleMOC.test | segmentation fault | | MultiSource/Benchmarks/FreeBench/distray/distray.test | different output | | MultiSource/Benchmarks/Olden/bh/bh.test | segmentation fault | | SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++-EH/spirit.test | seg...
2017 Feb 27
8
Noisy benchmark results?
...c <path-to-my-clang> --test-suite /data/repo/test-suite -j 8 I get three failures: --- Tested: 2465 tests -- FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.compile_time (1 of 2465) FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (494 of 2465) FAIL: MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C/XSBench/XSBench.execution_time (495 of 2465) Is this known/expected or do I do something stupid? Thanks, Mikael
2017 Feb 28
2
Noisy benchmark results?
...-j 8 >> >> I get three failures: >> >> --- Tested: 2465 tests -- >> FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.compile_time (1 of 2465) >> FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (494 of 2465) >> FAIL: MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C/XSBench/XSBench.execution_time (495 of 2465) >> >> Is this known/expected or do I do something stupid? >> >> Thanks, >> Mikael >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >&gt...
2017 Feb 27
3
Noisy benchmark results?
...> > > I get three failures: > > > > --- Tested: 2465 tests -- > > FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.compile_time (1 of 2465) > > FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (494 of > 2465) > > FAIL: MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C/XSBench/XSBench.execution_time > (495 of 2465) > > > > Is this known/expected or do I do something stupid? > > > > Thanks, > > Mikael > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm....
2020 Jun 08
2
[cfe-dev] Adding SYCL tests in test-suite
...anguages, but perhaps we could add a "parallel/mixed" subfolder if/when such a test is added. Agreed, something like this would make sense to me: llvm-test-suite/SingleSource/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/SYCL/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/OpenMP/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/multiple/proxyapps/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/multiple/cloverleaf/... Thoughts? Cheers, Johannes Any other opinions? -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Johannes Doerfert <johannesdoerfert at gmail.com><mailto:johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 11:...
2020 Apr 16
2
[cfe-dev] Adding SYCL tests in test-suite
Thanks, Johannes! It would be nice to have some additional infrastructure to control execution of tests that have special resource requirements like this. We've seen some problems in our internal testing with parallel test execution causing system gridlock. Having a common way to address that would be great. One reason I thought separate SYCL folders (either at the top level or elsewhere in
2020 Jun 09
2
[cfe-dev] Adding SYCL tests in test-suite
...t perhaps we could add a "parallel/mixed" subfolder if/when such a test is added. Agreed, something like this would make sense to me: llvm-test-suite/SingleSource/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/SYCL/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/OpenMP/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/multiple/proxyapps/... llvm-test-suite/parallel/multiple/cloverleaf/... Thoughts? Cheers, Johannes Any other opinions? -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Johannes Doerfert <johannesdoerfert at gmail.com><mailto:johannesdoerfert at gmail.com><mai...
2017 Oct 11
3
[PATCH 0/2] v2v: -i vmx: Allow deviceType field to be completely omitted.
A colleague found some VMX files which omit the deviceType field. This allows -i vmx mode to parse them. Rich.
2017 Sep 22
0
[RFC] Polly Status and Integration
Hi Hal, On 09/21, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev wrote: > > On 09/12/2017 10:26 PM, Gerolf Hoflehner wrote: > > > > > >>On Sep 11, 2017, at 10:47 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev > >><llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 09/11/2017 12:26 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: > >>>Hi Hal,
2019 Aug 14
9
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 2 is here
Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc2 was tagged yesterday from the release_90 branch at r368683. In the Git monorepo it's available as the llvmorg-9.0.0-rc2 tag. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc2 Binaries will be added as they become available. The tag went in roughly one week behind schedule (see "Upcoming Releases" at https://llvm.org), but
2019 Jul 29
10
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 is here
Hi everyone, 9.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r367217 (tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc1 in the Git monorepo). Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc1 Binaries will be added as they become available. Please file bug reports for any issues you find as blockers of https://llvm.org/PR42474 Release testers: please start your engines, run the
2019 Sep 13
4
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 5 is here
Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc5 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371837. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc5. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc5 Binaries will be added as they become available. There is only a single change from rc4 to rc5. Once more, the hope is that this will be the last release candidate and that we can
2019 Dec 14
5
LLVM 9.0.1-rc3 has been tagged
Hi, I've just tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc3. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. This will be the last release candidate unless there is a major problem. I'm planning to tag the final release on Dec 19. -Tom
2019 Sep 10
15
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 4 is here
Hello again, 9.0.0-rc4 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371490. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc4. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc4 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are not a lot of changes from rc3 to rc4, and there are again no open release blockers, so I'm hoping this will be the last
2019 Nov 23
5
LLVM 9.0.1-rc1 Release has been tagged
Hi, I've tagged the LLVM 9.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and upload binaries. I've also updated the test-release.sh script to pull from GitHub instead of SVN, if you run into any issues with the new script, let me know. -Tom
2019 Dec 20
7
LLVM 9.0.1-final has been tagged
Hi, I've just tagged the 9.0.1-final release. Testers can begin uploading binaries. -Tom
2019 Aug 30
9
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 is here
Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc3 was tagged today from the release_90 branch at r370450. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc3. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc3 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are currently no open release blockers, which means if nothing new comes up, the final release could ship soon and this is
2019 Dec 07
6
LLVM 9.0.1-rc2 has been tagged
Hi, I've tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc2. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. If all goes well, this will be the last -rc. -Tom
2017 Sep 22
4
[RFC] Polly Status and Integration
On 09/12/2017 10:26 PM, Gerolf Hoflehner wrote: > > >> On Sep 11, 2017, at 10:47 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> >> On 09/11/2017 12:26 PM, Adam Nemet wrote: >>> Hi Hal, Tobias, Michael and others, >>> *...* >>> >>> One thing that I’d
2019 Sep 17
18
[9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 6 is here
Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc6 This is the same as rc5 plus one very minor change (r371969) that still seemed good to pick up. I'm not allocating extra time for testing this one, expecting to tag