search for: shrink

...FS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 CIFS VFS: Send error in Close = -9 TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 80.235.63.248:64721/37374 shrinks window 1814256320:1814257772. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 80.235.63.248:64721/37374 shrinks window 1814256320:1814257772. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 196.29.40.33:42283/80 shrinks window 1747071341:1747071342. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 196.29.40.33:42283/80 shrin...

got a centos5.2 web/database server thats on a public coloc, its dmesg fills up with TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 82.135.195.32:64905/8032 shrinks window 354477433:354478918. Repaired. TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 84.158.80.177:61931/8032 shr...

Hi, I have an ext3 file system created with -T largefile4 option. Now it is running out of inode but it's only about 10% full. - Is there a way now to increase the number of inode without making a new file system? - If not, I am thinking about shrinking the file system, and then use the free up space to create a new file system with more inodes, and move the data over. Since I am already running out of inode, would I still be able to shrink the file system? Thanks, ... ling

...bitfields. If some bitfields are natural aligned and their num of bits can form a legal integer type that the target supports, it is more efficient to access them directly than doing a large integer load/store plus a series of bit operations. We call such reverse transformation legal type bitfield shrinking. Currently, llvm depends on DAGCombiner to do such shrinking. However, DAGCombiner has the one-basic-block-a-time limitation, so we started to implement a new shrinking optimization in https://reviews.llvm.org/D30416, and initially put it in instcombine, then moved it to CGP because we want to...

Hi Francis, Thanks for getting back to me. Could you please provide more details about the problems you encounter with those tools and what improvements required to improve compact unwinding format? Most of my experience is in the mid end, but it is still surprising to me that an improved shrink wrap will break that many tools, considering the fact that gcc has a good shrink wrapping pass and shrink-wrap-separate pass. Also, if possible, would you be able to share some performance numbers you get back then by improving shrink-wrap? Thanks, Jimmy -----Original Message----- From: Francis...

...d, Thanks for following up with that and sorry for the breakage. Couple of comments: MachineLoopInfo *MLI; + RegScavenger *RS; Would it make sense to use a unique_ptr here? That should eliminate the need of having explicit deletes. +; RUN: llc -mtriple=aarch64-linux-gnu -o - %s Add -enable-shrink-wrap=true and a second RUN line with -enable-shrink-wrap=false. Then add check lines for both to ensure shrink-wrapping is doing the right thing. + %0 = load i32, i32* @g1, align 4 Please use opt -instnamer to get rid of the numbered variables. Those are a pain when updating the tests :). Other...

Hi, Sorry for bringing back such an old thread. I am interested in the latest status of the shrink wrapping pass in LLVM. I have found some active work back in 2017 from Francis Visoiu Mistrih and Kit Barton from the following links. However, it seems that all the work suddenly stops and the improvement for the existing shrink wrapping did not make it into the trunk. Is this work abandoned? htt...

Hi Quentin, After shrink-wrapping was enabled as default on AArch64, llc has a seg fault when compiling the attached .ll file on AArch64. My command is llc -mcpu=cortex-a57 bug.ll Best, Haicheng -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bug.ll Type: application/octet-stream Siz...

Hi Does anyone know if the shrink wrap pass works for ARM architecture? I tried it seems not working. Which architecture shrink warp was originally designed for? Thanks, Yin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/201...

...tural aligned and their num of bits can form a >> legal integer type that the target supports, it is more efficient to >> access them directly than doing a large integer load/store plus a >> series of bit operations. We call such reverse transformation legal >> type bitfield shrinking. Currently, llvm depends on DAGCombiner to do >> such shrinking. >> >> However, DAGCombiner has the one-basic-block-a-time limitation, so we >> started to implement a new shrinking optimization in >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D30416, and initially put it in instcombi...

...#39;ve seen several examples recently of performance opportunities on POWER if we can improve the location of save/restore code for callee-saved registers. Both Nemanja and myself have discussed this with several people, and it seems that there are two possibilities for improving this: 1. Extend shrink wrapping to make the analysis of callee-saved registers more precise. 2. Focus on enabling and (possibly) improving SplitCSR. I would like opinions from people on the preferred way to proceed. I am leaning toward improving shrink wrapping, at least as a short-term solution. However, I f...

Here is an updated patch for shrink wrapping with: - spills/restores done with stack slot stores/loads - stack adjustment removed - refactoring (but still in need of more) - spill/restore insertion code unified with spill/restore placement code Documentation available here<http://wiki.github.com/jdmdj/llvm-work/shrink-wrapping-wo...

...tural aligned and their num of bits can form a >> legal integer type that the target supports, it is more efficient to >> access them directly than doing a large integer load/store plus a >> series of bit operations. We call such reverse transformation legal >> type bitfield shrinking. Currently, llvm depends on DAGCombiner to do >> such shrinking. >> >> However, DAGCombiner has the one-basic-block-a-time limitation, so we >> started to implement a new shrinking optimization in >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D30416, and initially put it in instcombi...

I know nothing about this pass, but here are a few comments. > Does anyone know if the shrink wrap pass works for ARM architecture? First, how are you invoking it? Looks to be a command line option, so -mllvm -shrink-wrap should enable it. Assuming you have a Debug build, you can see the debug output using -debug-only=shrink-wrap. > I tried it seems not working. Which architecture s...

On Mar 13, 2009, at 10:43 AM, John Mosby wrote: > > I started to reduce the traversals, then decided to work on edge > splitting because I believe it may be needed to finish shrink > wrapping. Hmm. I don't think edge splitting would be required for correctness, right? There is always a common predecessor / successor. For the first pass, we should not be shooting to optimal solution. > > I will return to that work and see if I can reduce the traversals,...

[Continuing a discussion from IRC so we have a permanent record] We want to shrink a disk image using virt-resize. Shrinking is harder and not really documented. It requires some manual calculations too. Here is the original: $ virt-df -a 209e6911-fe48-4321-900f-928b3400df88 Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% 209e6911-fe48-4321-900f-928...

...ot far enough along to send out a proposal. > Moving pro/epi generation out of TRI, perhaps into its own "component" is > one architecture I am looking at. > > > It's not necessary to update all the targets at once. We can ask targets to > opt in to take advantage of shrink wrapping. > That sounds good. I now have a better handle on the differences between the targets: XCore handles frame moves in its spillCalleeSavedRegister(), the ARM code for this is very straightforward. I hope to have an updated patch done tomorrow, with doc. and explicated examples. Thanks...

...9;d prefer 2 independent swap partitions at the same priority. Here is the set up: /dev/sda1 + /dev/sdb1 -> md0 (raid1) md0 -> VolGroup00 VolGroup00 -> VG00LV00(/), VG00LV01(/home), VG00LV02(swap) I've gotten as far as : Turning off swap and removing LV02. Next step would be to shrink VG00. But it looks like you can only shrink a volume group by removing entire PV's. I only have 1 PV. So I think I'm stuck. Any ideas? Thanks, Steve

...ot; + << getBasicBlockName(MBB) << "\n"; + } + // DEBUG Code like this should also be inside ifndef NDEBUG. 3. It can still use more refactoring. :-) 4. clearSets(). It's not clear what sets it's clearing. Perhaps name it something like clearShrinkWrapData()? 5 +void PEI::placeSpillsAndRestores(MachineFunction &Fn) { + + DOUT << "Computing SAVE, RESTORE sets\n"; + + // If not shrink wrapping, all spills go into entry block, + // all restores in return blocks. + if (! ShrinkWrapping) { + // Do spills in the entry bl...

...mpiling onto proprietary simulation acceleration hardware. All > of this work used the C back end exclusively, since I wanted a > transparent > and easily debuggable flow. Welcome to the community. > > To learn more about the code generator, I decided to try > implementing shrink wrapping, a reasonably self-contained back end > transformation pass. > > I now have a preliminary implemenation of shrink wrapping, done as > an option to prologue/epilogue insertion under the switch --shrink- > wrap. Nice. > It is limited to X86 presently since that is th...