Displaying 19 results from an estimated 19 matches for "romix".
Did you mean:
remix
2009 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
Hi again,
2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2009, at 12:27 AM, Roman Levenstein <romix.llvm at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com>:
>>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>>>
>>>> bb368: 0x8fdad00, LLVM BB @0x8fc2c98, ID#1:
>>>> Predecessors according to...
2009 Jan 23
0
[LLVMdev] Small problem in BitVector.h
On Jan 23, 1:51 pm, Roman Levenstein <romix.l... at googlemail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Doing some profiling of llc, I noticed that some bitvector operations
> took longer than usual. Then I noticed that too many copies of
> BitVector obejcts are created, even when such operations like &=, ^=,
> |= are performed on thos...
2009 Jan 23
2
[LLVMdev] Small problem in BitVector.h
Hi,
Doing some profiling of llc, I noticed that some bitvector operations
took longer than usual. Then I noticed that too many copies of
BitVector obejcts are created, even when such operations like &=, ^=,
|= are performed on those bit vectors.
I looked at the BitVector ADT implementation in BitVector.h and
figured out that all assignment operations (except the usual
assignment operator)
2009 Jan 13
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
On Jan 13, 2009, at 12:27 AM, Roman Levenstein <romix.llvm at googlemail.com
> wrote:
> 2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com>:
>>
>> On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>>
>>> bb368: 0x8fdad00, LLVM BB @0x8fc2c98, ID#1:
>>> Predecessors according to CFG: 0x8fdac90 (#0)
>>&g...
2009 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
2009/1/13 Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com>:
>
> On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>
>> bb368: 0x8fdad00, LLVM BB @0x8fc2c98, ID#1:
>> Predecessors according to CFG: 0x8fdac90 (#0)
>> %R0<def> = MOVi 0, 14, %reg0, %reg0
>> *** STR %LR<kill>, %R0<kill>, %reg0, 0, 14, %reg0, Mem:ST(4,4)
>> [0x8fc2d68 + 0]
2009 Jan 14
1
[LLVMdev] FP problems in different backends?
Hi,
Here is yet another bug/miscompilation I've found while testing my
register allocator.
The compilation of the attached BC file fails on multiple backends, namely:
ia64, mips, mipsel, alpha
The failures are different from backend to backend (wrong register
classes, wrong operand types, etc). Please, just try to compile using
the attached BC file. I guess, it is related to the FP
2008 May 17
7
[LLVMdev] Forward: Discussion about custom memory allocators for STL
...to hear what others think about
- custom allocators,
- reasons for current inefficiency of many STL containers on Evan's/Chris configs and
- possibility of using 3rd party libs like Boost (or their parts) in LLVM
Thanks,
- Roman
----- Forwarded Mail ----
> From: Roman Levenstein <romix.llvm at googlemail.com>
> To: CVS Commit Messages for LLVM repository <llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Send: Friday, 16. May 2008, 19:20:29
> Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] Speeding up RegAllocLinearScan on big test-cases
>
> Hi,
>
> 2008/5/7 Evan Cheng :
> > Can...
2009 Jan 30
1
[LLVMdev] Question about VNInfo updates by LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills
Hi,
It looks like LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills does not update all
of the LiveIntervals infos quite correctly.
In particular, if a live interval L is defined by Reg<-Reg copy
instructions whose srcReg is later spilled by the
addIntervalsForSpills() function, its VNInfo information is not
updated in a proper way. It still points to the same MachineInstr as
before, even though the
2009 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] ia64 target problems with ELF sections
Hi,
Compilation of the the following very simple file crashes with
--march=ia64 on my x86 machine.
; ModuleID = 'bugpoint-reduced-simplified.bc'
target datalayout =
"e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32"
target triple = "i386-pc-linux-gnu"
@x = weak global [8 x i32] zeroinitializer, align
2009 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Hi Richard,
Thanks for working on this! Your patched solved my initial problem,
but introduced another one. Please find attached another BC file that
fails on xcore with the linear scan regalloc.
This is the error message I get
eliminateFrameIndex Frame size too big: -3
0 llc 0x08affd1e
1 libc.so.6 0xb7d35a01 abort + 257
2 llc 0x081a0972
2009 Jul 29
0
[LLVMdev] Removing the bigblock register allocator.
Hi Lang,
There are at least two projects that were using BigBlock, directly or
indirectly.
One approach is described in the paper "Register Spilling and
Live-Range Splitting for SSA-Form Programs" by Matthias Braun and
Sebastian Hack.
It can be found here:
http://pp.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/publication.php?id=braun09cc
http://pp.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/uploads/publikationen/braun09cc.pdf
2009 Jul 30
0
[LLVMdev] Removing the bigblock register allocator.
Hi Chris,
2009/7/30 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>:
>
> On Jul 29, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>
>> Hi Lang,
>>
>> There are at least two projects that were using BigBlock, directly or
>> indirectly.
>
> Hi Roman,
>
> We have many plans to rip out linscan and replace it with something
> that handles large blocks better.
2009 Jan 13
3
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Hi again,
Now, after I fixed the graph coloring regalloc bug that was triggered
by the ARM target, I continue testing and found another bug, this time
on the XCore target. First I thought that it is again specific to my
register allocator, but it seems to be trigerred also by LLVM's
linearscan register allocator.
I don't know if the XCore target is stable enough in LLVM, or may be I
2009 Feb 28
1
[LLVMdev] Easiest way to rewrite machine instructions when each live range of a LiveInterval may be assigned a different physical register
Hi Evan,
Thanks a lot for your reply!
2009/2/27 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>:
>
> On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:20 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm working on the implementation of Extended Linear Scan register
>> allocator as described by Sarkar & Bodik.
>> One of the interesting features of their algorithm is the possibility
2009 Feb 27
2
[LLVMdev] Easiest way to rewrite machine instructions when each live range of a LiveInterval may be assigned a different physical register
Hi,
I'm working on the implementation of Extended Linear Scan register
allocator as described by Sarkar & Bodik.
One of the interesting features of their algorithm is the possibility
to allocate different physical registers to different live-ranges of
the same LiveInterval. Of course, it may require some glue code to be
inserted in cases, where different physical regs were assigned to
2009 Feb 05
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM misses some cross-MBB and loop optimizations compared to GCC
Hi,
While testing my new register allocators on some test-cases, I've
noticed that LLVM misses sometimes some optimization opportunities:
1) LocalSpiller::RewriteMBB seems not to propagate the information
about e.g. Spills between MBBs.In many cases, where MBB B1 has only
one predecessor MBB B2, B1 could reuse the information about the
physical registers that are in the live-out set of B2.
2009 Jan 07
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
Hi Evan,
Thanks for your feedback!
2009/1/7 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>:
>
> On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>
>
> As you can see, PrologEpilogInserter has inserted at the beginning
> of the function some code for manipulation of the frame pointer and
> this inserted code uses the LR register.
> As far as I understand,
2009 Jan 07
4
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in the ARM backend?
Hi,
I'm working on the iterated register coalescing graph coloring
allocator and try to test it with all backends available currently in
LLVM.
Initial tests with most of the backends are successful.
It turned out that my allocator triggers a specific assertion in the
RegScavenger and only for the ARM target. It looks like the LR
register is used for frame pointer related things,
but it is
2009 Jan 09
4
[LLVMdev] Is it possible to use the SimpleRegisterCoalescing pass in an iterative way?
Hi,
I'm implementing some variations of graph-coloring register allocators for LLVM.
Many of them perform their phases (e.g. coalescing, graph
simplification, spilling, color selection) in an iterative way. Since
LLVM provides an implementation of the coalescing in the
SimpleRegisterCoalescing class already, I would like to reuse it (even
though I could of course create my own coalescing