search for: r304244

...lt;mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Cool test :) >> It seems to work fine now, I don't see any new failures. IIUC, Kristof is also giving it another run. >> >> Cheers, >> Diana > > Latest comparisons on my side, after picking up r304244, i.e. the correct Localizer pass. > * CTMark compile time, comparing "-O0 -g" vs '-O0 -g -mllvm -global-isel=true -mllvm -global-isel-abort=0': about 6% increase with globalisel. This was about 3.5% before the Localizer pass landed. That one is surprising too. I wouldn’t have...

...does that sound to you? Thanks, Q > Le 1 juin 2017 à 07:46, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> a écrit : > > >> On 31 May 2017, at 17:07, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> Latest comparisons on my side, after picking up r304244, i.e. the correct Localizer pass. >>> * CTMark compile time, comparing "-O0 -g" vs '-O0 -g -mllvm -global-isel=true -mllvm -global-isel-abort=0': about 6% increase with globalisel. This was about 3.5% before the Localizer pass landed. >> >> That one is surpri...

...does that sound to you? > > Thanks, > Q > > Le 1 juin 2017 à 07:46, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> a écrit : > > > On 31 May 2017, at 17:07, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: > > > Latest comparisons on my side, after picking up r304244, i.e. the correct > Localizer pass. > * CTMark compile time, comparing "-O0 -g" vs '-O0 -g -mllvm > -global-isel=true -mllvm -global-isel-abort=0': about 6% increase with > globalisel. This was about 3.5% before the Localizer pass landed. > > > That one is sur...

...ee any new failures. IIUC, Kristof is also giving it another run. Cheers, Diana On 30 May 2017 at 22:57, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Diana, > > I’ve actually gone ahead and pushed the fix as I was able to produce a > small reproducer. > > This is r304244 > > Let me know if you encounter any other problem. > > Cheers, > -Quentin > > On May 30, 2017, at 7:42 AM, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Thanks Diana. > > That is indeed the assumption in the code and this is obvi...

...hanks, >> Q >> >> Le 1 juin 2017 à 07:46, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> a écrit : >> >> >> On 31 May 2017, at 17:07, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> Latest comparisons on my side, after picking up r304244, i.e. the correct >> Localizer pass. >> * CTMark compile time, comparing "-O0 -g" vs '-O0 -g -mllvm >> -global-isel=true -mllvm -global-isel-abort=0': about 6% increase with >> globalisel. This was about 3.5% before the Localizer pass landed. >> >&...

Thanks Diana. That is indeed the assumption in the code and this is obviously wrong. Could you try the attached patch? (I haven’t even tried to compile it though) Cheers, -Quentin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: localizer_tentative_fix.diff Type: application/octet-stream Size: 774 bytes Desc: not available URL: