search for: softek

Hello, Access Softek has a team of 9 people working on LLVM development. We also run the LLVM labs and manage the public buildbots. We are a consulting company and work on an hourly basis. We have limited availability (1 person full time) for a project if anyone needs LLVM work done. Please contact Chris Doner at 5...

...ofile-use. This option turns on > more precise cost model when computing rotation strategy but it is not > turned on by default. > > +carrot who is working on this area. > > thanks, > > David > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Victor Leschuk > <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com <mailto:vleschuk at accesssoftek.com>> wrote: > > Hello David, thanks for detailed response! > > Do you have any tests that you use to measure the PGO > effectiveness? I have tested clang version 6.0 with the same > sample that Jie Chen used in 2016 an...

Hello everyone, Access Softek now offers 24/7 support for the LLVM Lab. If any code owner needs to resolve something related to the LLVM Lab, he/she can call the 24/7 Access Softek Technical Support line. The call will be escalated as required. The phone number in the United States is 1-818-431-5850. Please mention LLVM Lab an...

Hello everyone, LLVM buildmasters (both main and staging) will be restarted in 2 hours (~3:00 AM PDT). -- Best Regards, Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer |Access Softek

...g/docs/UsersManual.html#profile-guided-optimization). The question is: is there any reason why exactly -O2 is used in examples? Are there any factors which can cause problems when using PGO with -O3? Thanks in advance for your advice! -- Best Regards, Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek

>I think we should wait until there is someone wanting to use these features with lld. > >Cheers, >Rafael Ok. Should we give an error when .note.gnu.property section is in the object?? ?Best regards, George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180321/76b1852c/attachment.html>

Victor, please file a bug tracking the issue. We can put relevant information there including test cases used in the experiment etc. thanks, David On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Victor Leschuk <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > David, could you please clarify on which code did you gain 10% > improvement? I have run numerous tests with and w/o this option and it > looks like it has no effect on performance (I am talking of the old 2016 > sample to be concrete). Maybe we could investigate it to...

...there any reason why exactly -O2 is used in > examples? Are there any factors which can cause problems when > using PGO > with -O3? > > Thanks in advance for your advice! > > -- > Best Regards, > > Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi...

...s that use profiling and of those which could be using but don't. However that thread is about 2 years old. Could you please kindly let me know if there were any significant changes in this area since that time? Thanks in advance! -- Best Regards, Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek

...ot; and this looks to be released with binutils 2.30. I think we can switch LLD either to "both" or probably to "gnu" by default as well. Initial version of patch that changes default to "both" is here: D38407 Any thoughts ? Best regards, George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc

...have any idea what can be wrong? Maybe there are some recommendations in which cases one should use PGO with clang and when it is better not to do it? Thanks! On 02/05/2018 09:38 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Victor Leschuk > <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com <mailto:vleschuk at accesssoftek.com>> wrote: > > Hello David! > > I have recently started acquaintance with PGO in LLVM/clang and found > your e-mail thread: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/099395.html > <http://lists.llv...

?But could not we for example do split dwarf, but for example do dedup of types ? I do not mean right now, but in a theory ? Best regards, George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc ________________________________ От: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> Отправлено: 16 декабря 2017 г. 22:25 Кому: George Rimar Копия: Sean Silva; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Rui Ueyama; Rafael Espindola Тема: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] - Deduplication of debug information in linkers (LLD)....

...ation-cost and there is about 10% speedup with -fprofile-use. This option turns on more precise cost model when computing rotation strategy but it is not turned on by default. +carrot who is working on this area. thanks, David On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Victor Leschuk <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > Hello David, thanks for detailed response! > > Do you have any tests that you use to measure the PGO effectiveness? I > have tested clang version 6.0 with the same sample that Jie Chen used in > 2016 and actually both frontend-based PGO and IR-based make code run &g...

I'd think we shouldn't do anything even for printing out a warning unless doing it is proved to be useful. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 1:04 AM George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > >I think we should wait until there is someone wanting to use these > features with lld. > > > >Cheers, > >Rafael > > Ok. Should we give an error when .note.gnu.property section is in the > object?​ > > ​Best regards, > George | Develop...

...ation). > The question is: is there any reason why exactly -O2 is used in > examples? Are there any factors which can cause problems when using PGO > with -O3? > > Thanks in advance for your advice! > > -- > Best Regards, > > Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pip...

...rove eh_frame_hdr build time because you don’t spend time on parsing garbage. However a linker will have to have two versions of GC: one with parsing eh_frames and another without parsing. There can be input object files where .eh_frame is not split. -Evgeny From: Igor Kudrin <ikudrin at accesssoftek.com> Date: Friday, 10 November 2017 at 12:23 To: Evgeny Astigeevich <Evgeny.Astigeevich at arm.com> Cc: nd <nd at arm.com>, "llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Making .eh_frame more linker-friendly Hi Evgeny, &gt...

On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Victor Leschuk <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > Hello David! > > I have recently started acquaintance with PGO in LLVM/clang and found > your e-mail thread: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/099395.html . Here you > posted a nice list of optimizations that use profiling and of those > whic...

> Le 2 oct. 2017 à 14:23, George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> a écrit : > > I think we can switch LLD either to "both" or probably to "gnu" by default as well. > Initial version of patch that changes default to "both" is here: D38407 > > Any thoughts ? > > Best regards, > George | Developer | Ac...

...much every other DWARF section. If you have other goals, let us know what they are. Thanks, --paulr > -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of via > llvm-dev > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 1:08 PM > To: vleschuk at accesssoftek.com; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] debug_rnglists status > > Hi Victor! > > I am just about to commit https://reviews.llvm.org/D49214, the first > implementation of .debug_rnglists. As you can probably see from the review > it generates the v5 range lis...

Yeah, not sure either. The discussion about minimum compatibility usually comes down to what version is available on long-term OS releases. On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 12:38 PM George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > > Is the code currently broken? > > > I don't know. Perhaps the code is fine, I did not try to compile LLVM > with all that compilers > > that we claim as supported though. I just *guess* that we don't have a > bot that builds LLVM with Clang 3....