search for: unif

Currently the nv30 and nv40 Gallium drivers are very similar, and contain about 5000 lines of essentially duplicate code. I prepared a patchset (which can be found at http://repo.or.cz/w/mesa/mesa-lb.git/shortlog/refs/heads/unification+fixes) which gradually unifies the drivers, one file per the commit. A new "nvfx" directory is created, and unified files are put there one by one. After all patches are applied, the nv30 and nv40 directories are removed and the only the new nvfx directory remains. The first patc...

Hi All, I wanted to understand the type unification algorithm (the implementations of 'refineAbstractTypeTo') used in LLVM. In the source code, there are a lot of code relevant to 'refineAbstractTypeTo', and I didn't find a big picture about how it works. Does the code implement any standard type unification algorithm tha...

On 2 November 2015 at 18:40, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella at linaro.org> wrote: > Is it 39 or 42-bit VMA? I noted a 42-bit issue in segment definition > that I have fixed on my TSAN unification mapping patch [1]: No, that's 39-bit. cheers, --renato

Hello Community Congratulations everyone for the reunification. To kick off the process, shall we finalize channels we are going to use for communication so that all the developers involved know what is going on and where. Which ML and IRC would be used for 'semi-official' communication etc. 1. Danny, Quinn and Marex have already started worki...

...: > > opt -load <path>/libLLVMDataStructure.so -load <path>/libpoolalloc.so > -poolalloc input.bc -f -o output.bc > > A couple of warnings about the alias analysis passes in DSA: > > 1) I believe all the alias analysis implementations are based on DSA. > DSA is a unification-based algorithm, so I think you might see > unification even in non-unification algorithms like Andersons. Andrew, > does this sound correct? > > 2) I have not used the alias analysis passes in DSA, so I don't know how > well they work. > > -- John T. > > -----...

...poolalloc, then you do the following: opt -load <path>/libLLVMDataStructure.so -load <path>/libpoolalloc.so -poolalloc input.bc -f -o output.bc A couple of warnings about the alias analysis passes in DSA: 1) I believe all the alias analysis implementations are based on DSA. DSA is a unification-based algorithm, so I think you might see unification even in non-unification algorithms like Andersons. Andrew, does this sound correct? 2) I have not used the alias analysis passes in DSA, so I don't know how well they work. -- John T.

I developed a solution to the problem where you might have systems setup w/ winbind mapping GIDs and UIDs, NSS, and PAM setup so windows users can login, but winbind maps possible different UIDs/GIDs from system to system preventing unified UIDs/GIDs in your environment. I tried having one box setup with NSS winbind / PAM etc. plus I made that system an NIS master w/ a script to periodically pull the windows UIDs and GIDs into passwd and group maps. The NIS clients did NIS in nsswitch.conf with PAM windbind auth and winbind doesn...

...kernel/process-io.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ I don't particularly like this new file. It's also not in a proper place. > arch/x86/kernel/process_32.c | 29 ++++++++--------------------- > arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c | 26 +++++--------------------- Yay, this I like :). However, unification is best done in a separate step. First make the two parts equal in one or two patches. Then, in a separate patch, do the mechanical unification. > 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/process-io.h > > diff --git a/arch/x86/ke...

...kernel/process-io.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ I don't particularly like this new file. It's also not in a proper place. > arch/x86/kernel/process_32.c | 29 ++++++++--------------------- > arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c | 26 +++++--------------------- Yay, this I like :). However, unification is best done in a separate step. First make the two parts equal in one or two patches. Then, in a separate patch, do the mechanical unification. > 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/process-io.h > > diff --git a/arch/x86/ke...

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Cornu <nicolac76 at yahoo.fr> --- extlinux/main.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/extlinux/main.c b/extlinux/main.c index 6871fb1..385b364 100644 --- a/extlinux/main.c +++ b/extlinux/main.c @@ -1415,21 +1415,12 @@ static int open_device(const char *path, struct stat *st, char

Hi LLVM dev team: I am now doing an experiment to comparing Steensgaard-style and Andersen-style pointer analysis on LLVM. Since steensgaard pointer analysis is in module "poolalloc", so I installed poolalloc release 2.6 on my machine(intel X86_64 RedHatEnterpriseLinux 5.1, gcc-4.2.4), two directories "include" and "lib" were created after installation but no

...x, i32 %y) { >> entry: >> %adds = add nsw i32 %x, %y >> %addu = add nuw i32 %x, %y >> %cond = select i1 %b, i32 %adds, i32 %addu >> ret i32 %cond >> } > > > It is important to not propagate the nsw/nuw between the two SCEV > expressions (which unification would do today, can I consider that a bug or > is it a feature?). > > > It's an intentional design choice. > > So we work-around it by not informing SCEV of the flags: > > Printing analysis 'Scalar Evolution Analysis' for function 'func': >>...

...: > > opt -load <path>/libLLVMDataStructure.so -load <path>/libpoolalloc.so > -poolalloc input.bc -f -o output.bc > > A couple of warnings about the alias analysis passes in DSA: > > 1) I believe all the alias analysis implementations are based on DSA. > DSA is a unification-based algorithm, so I think you might see > unification even in non-unification algorithms like Andersons. Andrew, > does this sound correct? > > 2) I have not used the alias analysis passes in DSA, so I don't know how > well they work. > > -- John T. > > -----...

...le: define i32 @func(i1 zeroext %b, i32 %x, i32 %y) { > entry: > %adds = add nsw i32 %x, %y > %addu = add nuw i32 %x, %y > %cond = select i1 %b, i32 %adds, i32 %addu > ret i32 %cond > } It is important to not propagate the nsw/nuw between the two SCEV expressions (which unification would do today, can I consider that a bug or is it a feature?). So we work-around it by not informing SCEV of the flags: Printing analysis 'Scalar Evolution Analysis' for function 'func': > Classifying expressions for: @func > %adds = add nsw i32 %x, %y > -->...

?Hello everybody, I'm working on the "Use difftime for time comparison" bug (#313634). Charles directed me to the other one "Use monotonic clock for monitoring" attended to by Baruch; I believe that's very good idea, however I'd use a bit more encapsulated & general approach: 1/ I'd create an opaque timer type and its get/set/cmp/inc/dec etc interface

...ed, try the TD pass, not EQTD, and see if that works better for you. Having said that, DSA currently doesn't do well with vtables. It is not a fundamental limitation of the algorithm itself and we think we know how to improve it, so if those are important to you, let me know. DSA is indeed a unification-style analysis, not inclusion based. It is partially context sensitive (someone else labeled it "bottom-up context sensitive" in a later paper), which makes up for unification in some cases. As you probably know, the two are not comparable: inclusion style analyses will do better...

...t motivates Chris Lattner's PLDI'07 paper, and external function models are helpful since without them the analysis has to be extremely conservative and concludes everything that external functions touch all may-alias each other. I’m still a big fan of context sensitive, flow insensitive, unification based models. Contrary to your claim, context sensitivity *is* useful for mod-ref analysis, e.g. “can I hoist a load across this call”? Context sensitivity improves the precision of the mod/ref set of the call. -Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbe...

On 03/25/2016 08:08 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > I’m still a big fan of context sensitive, flow insensitive, > unification based models. Interestingly I find the unification approach quite unsatisfactory sometime. What happens there is pointers with the same "depth" are too often clobbered together unless they are really unrelated to each other. > Contrary to your claim, context sensitivity *is*...

.../ .  They're not part >> of a normal checkout due to patent issues. >> >> > > I don't quite understand. You mean steensgaard / DSA are patented? Steensgaard certainly is. It's covered by multiple patents, in fact Steensgaard (and MS Research) hold patents on all unification based pointer analysis.

...In any > case, it's at least cleaner and clearer to express this in a single > config statement. Congrats! You found by the way a bug in commit e279b6c1d329e50b766bce96aacc197eae8a053b Author: Sam Ravnborg <sam at ravnborg.org> Date: Tue Nov 6 20:41:05 2007 +0100 x86: start unification of arch/x86/Kconfig.* ...and proper fix seems to split PCI stuff to common + X86_32 only + X86_64 only -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko