similar to: adding infrequent date labels to x-axis

There is a phi-node "%phi = phi i64 [%cast1, %if], [%cast2, %else]" in the common successor. The actual control flow is a bit more complex, but there is a common successor block, and %cast1 and %cast2 are the two values that the phi node in the common successor takes. Does the existence of the phi node affect optimization? Thanks, Taewook From: <mats.o.petersson at

and by "right thing" i mean it can hoist if you want and it can prove it will not extend the live range. Note that VBE (very busy expressions) is a code size optimization only. It does not save time. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > This GVN does not do that, this is correct. It is a very simple GVN. All > phi nodes are

Hello, I found that GVN doesn't promote identical sequence of instructions in if and else branch to their common predecessors. For example, for the following code snippet pred: … br i1 %cmp, label %if, label %else if: %incdec.ptr.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %ptr, i64 1 %cast1 = ptrtoint i8* %incdec.ptr.1 to i64 … else: %incdec.ptr.2 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %ptr,

Hi folk, I get the following stack trace and do have any clue how to fix the problem. 0 opt 0x087ecc99 1 opt 0x087ed265 2 0xb7f6a400 __kernel_sigreturn + 0 3 opt 0x086d4198 llvm::LeakDetector::addGarbageObject(llvm::Value const*) + 29 4 opt 0x0872945f llvm::Instruction::Instruction(llvm::Type const*, unsigned int,

Hi, I am trying to assemble a preety simple program, but the assembler is giving parse errors: =========================== %.LC0 = internal constant [17 x sbyte] c"Hello World %d \0A\00" %.LC1 = internal constant [17 x sbyte] c"yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy\0a\00" declare int "puts"(sbyte*) int "main"() { %cast1 = getelementptr [17 x sbyte]* %.LC0, long 0, long 0

Hi all, I have a question regarding a transformation that is carried out in InstCombine, which has been introduced by r48715. It unfolds expressions of the form `zext(or(icmp, (icmp)))` to `or(zext(icmp), zext(icmp)))` to expose pairs of `zext(icmp)`. In a subsequent iteration these `zext(icmp)` pairs could then (possibly) be optimized by another optimization (which has already been there before

Hi Sanjay, thank you a lot for your answer. I understand that in your examples it is desirable that `foo` and `goo` are canonicalized to the same IR, i.e., something like `@goo`. However, I still have a few open questions, but please correct me in case I'm thinking in the wrong direction. > Am 21.07.2016 um 18:51 schrieb Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>: > > I've

Hi, I am running a RH9.0 server, using samba 2.2.7a. I use winbind to authenticate pop3 clients (Courier IMAP through authpam, but I think that's irrelevant). Users are defined in a NT4 domain. Sometimes, I get a NT_STATUS_PIPE_NOT_AVAILABLE error from pam_winbind.so. This is not very frequent, but at about 1000 users (read: many authentication request) it becomes a problem. Could anyone help

In an optimized build, debug info is just an approximation. It might help to debug in a build of R and packages without compiler optimizations (-O0), where the debug information is accurate. However, first I would try to modify the example to trigger more often, or try to find external ways to make it trigger more often (e.g. via gctorture). Then I would try to make the example smaller (not

A reply from stackoverflow suggests I might have hit this bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14023 I can confirm that this glibc bug affects my system (latest CentOS 7). However, as far as I know, R is not multithreaded in its core. Is it possible that some library triggered this? Regards, Steve Tomas Kalibera <tomas.kalibera at gmail.com> ?2019?8?2??? ??4:59??? >

The R script I run daily for hours looks like this: while (!finish) { Sys.sleep(0.1) time = as.integer(format(Sys.time(), "%H%M")) # always crash here if (new.data.timestamp() <= time) next # ... do some jobs for about 2 minutes ... gc() } Basically it waits for new data, which comes in every 10 minutes, and do some jobs, then gc(), then loop again. It

Hi Sanjay, > Am 02.08.2016 um 21:39 schrieb Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>: > > Hi Matthias - > > Sorry for the delayed reply. I think you're on the right path with D22864. No problem, thank you for your answer! > If I'm understanding it correctly, my foo() example and zext_or_icmp_icmp() will be equivalent after your patch is added to InstCombine.