search for: rebundling

...Samba 4 testing accessible, and I don't have to waste my time on backports that will be replaced by a release that is further, and further, and further behind. Perhaps in the future the configuration of the build and patch environments can be opened up, or the patching going on for the package rebundling can be published in just the way people with RHEL would publish their kernel patches, rather than presenting merely the results. But such ideas have been rejected as unnecessary, and even the suggestion was rejected with hostility. I know very well how much work such projects take, and regret that...

...; It is further insulting due to the fact that bundling is trivial to do > during scheduling, but it goes hard against the original assumptions > made elsewhere. Can you explain more about this? > Re-bundling is also a distinct task that might need to be addressed in > this context. Rebundling is certainly useful. I'm not sure what you mean by "in this context." > - We do need to have at least a distant plan for global scheduling. Yes, definitely! > BB scope is nice and manageable, but I can easily get several percent > of "missed" performance by s...

...Intervals obviously do not work with bundles... Two, semantics (dependencies) within a bundle are parallel (think { r0 = r1; r1 = r0 } in serial vs. parallel semantics) and if a pass needs to "understand" it, it will need to be "taught" how to do it. This is where incremental rebundling might come in handy. Fortunately we currently do bundling fairly late, so it is not an issue yet. > > > It is further insulting due to the fact that bundling is trivial to > do > > during scheduling, but it goes hard against the original assumptions > > made elsewhere. &gt...

My 2c... Even though I understand it might be way off in the future, but we are talking about long term plans here anyway. Also as a VLIW backend maintainer, I just have to say it :) - We do need to have a way to assign bundles much earlier than we do now. And it needs to be intertwined with scheduling (Bundler currently reuses a good chunk of scheduler infrastructure). It is also obvious

...do not work with bundles... > Two, semantics (dependencies) within a bundle are parallel (think { r0 = > r1; r1 = r0 } in serial vs. parallel semantics) and if a pass needs to > "understand" it, it will need to be "taught" how to do it. This is where > incremental rebundling might come in handy. Fortunately we currently do > bundling fairly late, so it is not an issue yet. LiveIntervals should work for your bundles by giving each instruction in the bundle the same slot index. Regalloc should do the right thing. There's a proof-of-concept API in LiveIntervalAnal...

Jakob, Please see my comments below. Hope this helps. Sergei -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum. From: Jakob Stoklund Olesen [mailto:stoklund at 2pi.dk] Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 1:02 PM To: Sergei Larin Cc: 'Ivan Llopard'; 'LLVM Developers Mailing List' Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Instruction bundles before RA: Rematerialization

On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:25 AM, "Sergei Larin" <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Generally as far as I concern, there is no way “generic” (platform independent) code can add instructions to bundles optimally I agree, there are too many ways of modeling stuff with bundles. That is why I took the philosophical stance of treating bundles as black boxes during RA. I think the

HI, i''m currently trying to connect a rails app using the "her" gem/library (since active ressource is gone since rails 4) to Puppet''s REST API. Now, "her" or activeressource both speak json, while Puppet speaks pson, which should be nearly the same according to some posts here. Communication already works but it seems that the response objects are not

> On Oct 27, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com <mailto:atrick at apple.com>> wrote: >> >>> The system works because the default basic block iterator moves from bundle to >>> bundle skipping the instructions inside the bundle. Iterating

Hi Sergei, Jakob, Thanks for your comments ! On 07/06/2012 20:41, Sergei Larin wrote: > > Jakob, > > Please see my comments below. Hope this helps. > > Sergei > > -- > > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum. > > *From:*Jakob Stoklund Olesen [mailto:stoklund at 2pi.dk] > *Sent:* Thursday, June 07, 2012 1:02 PM > *To:* Sergei

Hi Libguestfs team, I'm trying to build guestfs on Ubuntu 22.04, but getting below error. #17 8.021 checking for OCaml findlib package augeas... not found #17 8.024 configure: error: the OCaml module 'augeas' is required By guestfs-building doc I need to get the package from https://people.redhat.com/~rjones/augeas/. But there is not instructions on how and where to place the package

Hi again! On 08/06/2012 17:11, Ivan Llopard wrote: > Hi Sergei, Jakob, > > Thanks for your comments ! > > On 07/06/2012 20:41, Sergei Larin wrote: >> >> Jakob, >> >> Please see my comments below. Hope this helps. >> >> Sergei >> >> -- >> >> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum. >>

> On Oct 27, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote: >> >> == BUNDLE instruction / operands == >> For many backend passes a bundle can appear as a single unit. However one important tool >> here is having an iterator over all operands of this

Hi, Thanks for your explanations! How is the big picture for supporting in-order VLIW architectures and the like though? I am asking because I am currently implementing instruction scheduling in our own backend for our custom Patmos processor, for which I need to support both branch delay slots and bundles, some restrictions regarding bundles. For the moment, I am quite happy with a simple

Hi all, I fear this discussion will quickly devolve into a recursive flame- fest, but it needs to be broached, so here we go. Note that I kind of think this is more of dev topic than users, but I want to make sure everyone knows the conversation is happening and can easily participate. This is also likely to be the first of a series of conversations I''ll be starting to try to

Hi Evan, I just read your proposal and the following discussion for VLIW support and want to share my experience of writing a VLIW back-end for LLVM. I would not integrate the packetizer into the register allocator super class since it would reduce the flexibility for the back-end developer to add some optimization passes after the packetizer. Instead, I would add the packetizer as a separate

This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 or 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi shared vol? I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I where to add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? Thanks. Sent from a

Machine Instruction Bundle in LLVM Hi all, There have been quite a bit of discussions about adding machine instruction bundle to support VLIW targets. I have been pondering what the right representation should be and what kind of impact it might have on the LLVM code generator. I believe I have a fairly good plan now and would like to share with the LLVM community. Design Criteria 1. The