search for: xuzhongx

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 28 matches for "xuzhongx".

Did you mean: xuhong
2010 Jun 09
3
[LLVMdev] [llvmdev] Whole function SelectionDAG
...The first question is code placement. How is the compiler going to decide > which block (or blocks) to emit an instruction in? The answer to that will > help determine how control relationships should be represented. > > Dan > > > On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:56 PM, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > > I am trying to build a DAG for a whole function. The first problem I met >> is to assign a user for the last instruction of each basic block, be it >> BRCOND or other node. There is no natural user for such nodes. Without user, >> it will be r...
2010 Jun 11
0
[LLVMdev] [llvmdev] Whole function SelectionDAG
...idea: let the BasicBlockSDNode points to the last node in its predecessor blocks. But this will introduce cycles into the selection DAG, making it not a DAG anymore. So what's the impact of a non-DAG on the existing DAG legalizers and combiner? On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > At first I'll try the simplest strategy: put the instruction in the machine > BB corresponding to the LLVM BB where it comes from. > > To implement this, I plan to add an operand to non-passive node which > points to the BasicBlockSDNode which the no...
2010 Apr 19
5
[LLVMdev] Code Size Benchmark
Hi all, We did some benchmarks on code size with clang, gcc 4.5, and open64. Clang performed second in the test. The benchmark is CSiBE. Clang can't compile the linux kernel (some inline asm not supported) and replaypc (error: use of unknown builtin '__builtin_next_arg'). The concrete results are attached. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2010 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] Code Size Benchmark
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:11 AM, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > We did some benchmarks on code size with clang, gcc 4.5, and open64. Clang > performed second in the test. The benchmark is CSiBE. Clang can't compile > the linux kernel (some inline asm not supported) and replaypc (error: use of > unkn...
2010 Jun 08
0
[LLVMdev] [llvmdev] Whole function SelectionDAG
The first question is code placement. How is the compiler going to decide which block (or blocks) to emit an instruction in? The answer to that will help determine how control relationships should be represented. Dan On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:56 PM, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > I am trying to build a DAG for a whole function. The first problem I > met is to assign a user for the last instruction of each basic > block, be it BRCOND or other node. There is no natural user for such > nodes. Without user, it will be removed in l...
2010 Jun 11
1
[LLVMdev] [llvmdev] Whole function SelectionDAG
On Jun 11, 2010, at 12:48 AM, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > I have another idea: let the BasicBlockSDNode points to the last > node in its predecessor blocks. But this will introduce cycles into > the selection DAG, making it not a DAG anymore. > > So what's the impact of a non-DAG on the existing DAG l...
2010 Nov 29
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] draft rule for naming types/functions/variables
On 29 nov 2010 03:47 "Xu Zhongxing" <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I enjoyed the new coding style in recent patches. Camel case makes it > easy to pick a descriptive name. Starting functions and variables with > lower cases reduces chances to conflict with a type name. On the other hand, having names that only differ...
2010 Jun 08
2
[LLVMdev] [llvmdev] Whole function SelectionDAG
I am trying to build a DAG for a whole function. The first problem I met is to assign a user for the last instruction of each basic block, be it BRCOND or other node. There is no natural user for such nodes. Without user, it will be removed in later phases. My idea is to use it as chain for nodes in the next basic block. Is this reasonable? -Zhongxing Xu -------------- next part -------------- An
2007 Apr 09
2
[LLVMdev] New automated decision procedure for path-sensitive analysis
Hi Zhongxing, On 4/8/07, Zhongxing Xu <xuzhongxing at gmail.com> wrote: > I think the real difficult thing in path sensitive program analysis (or > symbolic execution) is not the lack of decision procedures, but the > translation of arbitrary pointer operations and library function calls in > C/C++ program into the mathematics sup...
2010 Nov 29
8
[LLVMdev] draft rule for naming types/functions/variables
Hi, I enjoyed the new coding style in recent patches. Camel case makes it easy to pick a descriptive name. Starting functions and variables with lower cases reduces chances to conflict with a type name. 2010/11/23 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) <wan at google.com> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) <wan at google.com> > wrote: > > +llvmdev > > >
2009 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] New LLVM Blog
2009/12/22 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > > On Dec 21, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > >> 2009/12/21 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> A few of us got together and started an official LLVM (and its >>> sub-projects) blog: >>>  http://blog.llvm.org/ >> >> Is it
2010 May 06
0
[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?
I build llvm+clang almost every day with Ubuntu 10.04. Everything goes fine. I guess it's your VirtualBox has too little memory. On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> wrote: > After waiting through about 2 hours of hard drive spinning for Clang to > link under my Xubuntu Lucid Lynx Linux setup on VirtualBox, ld finally just > gave up trying
2011 Sep 26
0
[LLVMdev] The ComputeHash algorithm in FoldingSet isunsafe
I should also implement NodeEquals() method. Please ignore this message. ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Xu Zhongxing"<xuzhongxing at foxmail.com>; Date: Mon, Sep 26, 2011 10:11 PM To: "llvmdev"<llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>; Subject: [LLVMdev] [LLVMDev] The ComputeHash algorithm in FoldingSet isunsafe I use FoldingSet to save some data structures. And I found somehow it always abandon a new node. I tra...
2007 Apr 09
0
[LLVMdev] New automated decision procedure for path-sensitive analysis
> > Spear takes a different approach - it is bit-precise, handles all > operators, but > currently doesn't handle arrays directly. However, the other mentioned > thm provers > handle arrays by encoding them as UIFs + several axioms. As UIFs can be > encoded > to SAT, I think that the theory of arrays could be as well. So, with a > bit of effort, > you should be
2007 Apr 09
0
[LLVMdev] New automated decision procedure for path-sensitive analysis
On 4/9/07, Domagoj Babic <babic.domagoj at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Traditionally, such analyses have been considered too expensive to be > practical, and were mostly an academic curiosity. The core of the > problem is the lack of adequate automated decision procedures which > could quickly determine whether a set of constraints is satisfiable or > not, and if it is
2009 Dec 22
3
[LLVMdev] New LLVM Blog
On Dec 21, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > 2009/12/21 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: >> Hi All, >> >> A few of us got together and started an official LLVM (and its sub- >> projects) blog: >> http://blog.llvm.org/ > > Is it online? I cannot open it. If it's online, I highly suspect it's > blocked by the GFW. Yep, it's
2010 May 05
5
[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?
After waiting through about 2 hours of hard drive spinning for Clang to link under my Xubuntu Lucid Lynx Linux setup on VirtualBox, ld finally just gave up trying to link it. I was using CMake's build scripts on version 2.7 release of LLVM and Clang. The version of ld is (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.20.1-system.20100303. Can anyone confirm this problem? If needed I'll cross-post this to
2007 Apr 08
2
[LLVMdev] New automated decision procedure for path-sensitive analysis
Dear LLVMers, This email is intended for those interested in path-sensitive analysis, integer overflow analysis, static analysis, and (perhaps) loop invariant computation. Traditionally, such analyses have been considered too expensive to be practical, and were mostly an academic curiosity. The core of the problem is the lack of adequate automated decision procedures which could quickly
2009 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] New LLVM Blog
2009/12/21 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > Hi All, > > A few of us got together and started an official LLVM (and its sub-projects) blog: >  http://blog.llvm.org/ Is it online? I cannot open it. If it's online, I highly suspect it's blocked by the GFW. > > I think that a blog is a potentially great way to cover some areas of LLVM that we're lacking in
2011 Jun 01
0
[LLVMdev] Bug in FoldingSetNodeID::AddInteger(unsigned long long I)?
The current implementation is: void FoldingSetNodeID::AddInteger(unsigned long long I) { AddInteger(unsigned(I)); if ((uint64_t)(int)I != I) Bits.push_back(unsigned(I >> 32)); } (uint64_t)(int)I first truncates I to signed int, which causes the second cast to sign extend the value to 64 bits. The problem is that if the 31st bit of the original value is 1, the sign extended value