search for: vleschuk

...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 <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...

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 i...

...2.92 sec Do you 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 > <...

...-force-precise-rotation-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...

...cations in pretty 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...

Hey all, It seems that the main buildmaster here is working fine http://lab.llvm.org:8011/ However, I have a 'connection refused' error whilst connecting to the staging buildmaster http://lab.llvm.org:8014/ Are you aware of this Victor and Galina? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello Wolfgang and team, I see that you are working on support of .debug_rnglists, I am interested in the feature too, could you please point me out what else left to be done so that I could help you? -- Best Regards, Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek

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...

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 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

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 2:24 PM Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Sep 30, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Victor Leschuk <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com> > wrote: > > > > Hello Adrian, sorry for the delay with the response. Somehow I missed > your message.. > > > > On 09/13/2016 12:43 AM, Adrian Prantl wrote: > >>> On Sep 10, 2016, at 12:50 PM, Victor Leschuk via llvm-dev < > ll...

Hello Adrian, sorry for the delay with the response. Somehow I missed your message.. On 09/13/2016 12:43 AM, Adrian Prantl wrote: >> On Sep 10, 2016, at 12:50 PM, Victor Leschuk via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I am currently implementing support for DWARFv5 DW_AT_alignment attr and I got a question about align field in

Hello David and all involved =) On 02/05/2018 09:38 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > ThinLTO also works well with PGO. Could you please let me know if there are any problems which prevent using PGO with FullLTO? Thanks in advance! -- Best Regards, Victor Leschuk | Software Engineer | Access Softek

...e very useful. I look forward to reviewing this. How do you feel about creating a [WIP] diff for (2). I'm very excited about bundling our efforts on this. Let me know what I can do if there's anything else I can help with. Cheers, Jonas > On 17 Jan 2018, at 16:40, Victor Leschuk <vleschuk at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > > Hello, I hope I will have time to help you with that. I discussed > dwarfv5 .debug_names implementation with involved party from RH. Anyway > even if can't help much could you keep me in the loop please? > > > On 01/17/2018 07:13 PM, Pa...

Hello, I hope I will have time to help you with that. I discussed dwarfv5 .debug_names implementation with involved party from RH. Anyway even if can't help much could you keep me in the loop please? On 01/17/2018 07:13 PM, Pavel Labath via llvm-dev wrote: > Hello all, > > In <https://reviews.llvm.org/D41986#977215> it was brought up that > there are at least two parties

Hello all, In <https://reviews.llvm.org/D41986#977215> it was brought up that there are at least two parties interested in having DWARF5 accelerator tables implemented, so I'm writing this email to see if there's anyone else interested in this topic, and to try to synchronize our efforts. Our interest for this stems from a desire to make dwarf parsing fast on non-apple targets

Hello again, It's been nearly six months since my first email, so it's a good time to recap what has been done here so far. I am happy to report that stages 1-3 (i.e. producer/consumer in llvm and integration with lldb) of my original plan are now complete with one caveat. The caveat is that the .debug_names section is presently not a full drop-in replacement for the .apple_*** sections.