search for: visiticmpinst

...spatel at rotateright.com] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 8:00 PM To: Evgeny Astigeevich Cc: llvm-dev; nd Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines > Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? Yes. Although (this just came up in D28625 too) we might need to remove multiple versions of that in order to unlock optimization: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp#L4338 https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transfo...

...t-before-all -print-after-all’ for r292487 and rL292492. > If it's possible, can you remove that check locally, rebuild, > and try the benchmark again on your system? I'd love to know > if that change alone would solve the problem. Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? Kind regards, Evgeny Astigeevich Senior Compiler Engineer Compilation Tools ARM From: Sanjay Patel [mailto:spatel at rotateright.com] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 6:16 PM To: Evgeny Astigeevich Cc: llvm-dev; Renato Golin; t.p.northover at gmail.com; hfinkel at anl.gov Subject: Re: [InstComb...

...l at rotateright.com>] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 8:00 PM To: Evgeny Astigeevich Cc: llvm-dev; nd Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines > Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? Yes. Although (this just came up in D28625 too) we might need to remove multiple versions of that in order to unlock optimization: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp#L4338 https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transfo...

...2, 2017 8:00 PM > To: Evgeny Astigeevich > Cc: llvm-dev; nd > > > Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines > > > > > Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? > > > > Yes. Although (this just came up in D28625 too) we might need to remove multiple versions of that in order to unlock optimization: > > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp#L4338 <https://github.com/ll...

...Astigeevich >> Cc: llvm-dev; nd >> >> >> Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines >> >> >> >> > Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? >> >> >> >> Yes. Although (this just came up in D28625 too) we might need to remove multiple versions of that in order to unlock optimization: >> >> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp#L4338 &...

...l at rotateright.com>] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 8:00 PM To: Evgeny Astigeevich Cc: llvm-dev; nd Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines > Do you mean to remove the hack in InstCombiner::visitICmpInst()? Yes. Although (this just came up in D28625 too) we might need to remove multiple versions of that in order to unlock optimization: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp#L4338 https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transfo...

Hi, We found that today's 17.30%/11.37% performance regressions in LNT SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/sieve on LNT-AArch64-A53-O3__clang_DEV__aarch64 and LNT-Thumb2v7-A15-O3__clang_DEV__thumbv7 (http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/daily_report/2017/1/20?filter-machine-regex=aarch64%7Carm%7Cthumb%7Cgreen) are caused by changes [rL292492] in InstCombine: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28406

On May 24, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On May 24, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> Let us know if you would like extra eyes on the two PPC failures. >> Many >> of us have a lot of experience with C++. :-) Do you know where these >> allocations are? > > I don't mind if people help out, so here's some information: Nice!

On May 24, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Let us know if you would like extra eyes on the two PPC failures. Many > of us have a lot of experience with C++. :-) Do you know where these > allocations are? I don't mind if people help out, so here's some information: FAIL: /nfs/llvm/src/llvm/test/Transforms/PredicateSimplifier/ 2006-11-04-ReplacingZeros.ll Failed with