similar to: Suggestions for a plug and play CA certificate manager?

Hi (Adding the list back in). On 1 August 2013 08:44, Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> wrote: > i know where to calculate CSRs. the additional stack space is calculated in > PEI::calculateCalleeSavedRegisters. the real instructions are inserted in > insertCSRSpillsAndRestores. > my point is why llvm code honor 'naked' but does not 'noreturn' for CSR. And to me

On 2017-10-27 19:50, Hal Finkel wrote: > On 10/27/2017 03:32 PM, Jun Lim via llvm-dev wrote: > >> When compiling C code below for AArach64, I saw that shrink-wrapping >> didn't happen due to the very early uses of CSRs in the entry block. >> So CSR spills/reloads are executed even when the early exit block is >> taken. >> >> int getI(int i); >>

When compiling C code below for AArach64, I saw that shrink-wrapping didn't happen due to the very early uses of CSRs in the entry block. So CSR spills/reloads are executed even when the early exit block is taken. int getI(int i); int foo(int *P, int i) { if (i>0) return P[i]; i = getI(i); return P[i]; } It's not that hard to find such cases where

On 2017-11-10 07:47, Nemanja Ivanovic wrote: > One thing I thought about doing a while back and never really wrote a > POC for is the following: > - Make FirstCSRCost a property of the MachineBasicBlock (or create a > map of MBB* -> FirstCSRCost) > > - Implement a pre-RA pass that will populate the map as follows: > > - Identify all blocks with calls > > -

On 2017-10-30 21:20, Hal Finkel wrote: > On 10/30/2017 12:20 PM, junbuml at codeaurora.org wrote: >> On 2017-10-27 19:50, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On 10/27/2017 03:32 PM, Jun Lim via llvm-dev wrote: >>> >>>> When compiling C code below for AArach64, I saw that shrink-wrapping >>>> didn't happen due to the very early uses of CSRs in the entry

On 2017-11-14 17:22, Quentin Colombet wrote: > Hi, > > I think it is kind of artificial to tie the CSRCost with the presence > of calls. > I think I’ve already mentioned it in one of the review, but I > believe it would be better to differentiate when we want to use a CSR > to avoid spilling or to avoid splitting. CSR instead of spilling is > good, CSR instead of

On 2017-11-17 13:10, Quentin Colombet wrote: >> On Nov 16, 2017, at 2:31 PM, junbuml at codeaurora.org wrote: >> On 2017-11-14 17:22, Quentin Colombet wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I think it is kind of artificial to tie the CSRCost with the >>> presence >>> of calls. >>> I think I’ve already mentioned it in one of the review, but I

Hi Graham, Thanks for sharing this. Are you planning on enabling the pass only on PGO? Even in non-PGO, I noticed some performance gains when we are aggressive in partially inlining the early return part, especially when the callee spill CSRs in the entry block. At a high level, I have two questions: 1. What is the main obstacle that prevent the pass from being enabled by default? 2.

On Mar 1, 2009, at 2:57 PM, John Mosby wrote: > First, thanks very much for your comments! > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> > wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:02 PM, John Mosby wrote: > > It is limited to X86 presently since that is the only target I have > > access to at the moment. > > What part of this is

All, I would like to apply a set of rules to each row of the sample data set below. The rule sets are the guidelines for determining an individual's date for retirement eligibility. The rules are found in this document, http://www.opm.gov/feddata/RetirementPaperFinal_v4.pdf. I am only interested in the top two categories for retirement eligibility, the CSRS and FERS plans. The data set has

First, thanks very much for your comments! On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:02 PM, John Mosby wrote: > > It is limited to X86 presently since that is the only target I have > > access to at the moment. > > What part of this is target dependent? Is this due to emitPrologue / > emitEpilogue being

Hi, I noticed some performance gains in some spec benchmarks without significant code size bloat when aggressively performing partial inlining, especially when the original callee spill CSRs in the entry block. I guess the partial inlining is not enabled mainly due to the code size. Is there any other issue which prevent the pass from being enabled? Do we have any plan or any on-going works

Hi, While puppet creates its own directories for internal stuff (puppetca, state, etc.), there''s a fair bit of latitude given to where things like manifests and uploaded files live. I didn''t get much guidance from the docs when I first set things up so I mostly poked at things until the worked. Take a look at the following and let me know if this looks reasonable; if so, it

Hi, Is there any way to store HostKey in hardware (and delegate the related processing)? I have been using Roumen Petrov's x509 patch for clients, which works via an OpenSSL engine, but it does not seem to support server HostKey: http://roumenpetrov.info/pipermail/ssh_x509_roumenpetrov.info/2012q4/000019.html For PKCS#11, I have found an email on this list from a year back suggesting this

I am having SSL difficulties setting up a new puppet client: Client: fedora (rawhide) using 0.23.2 Server: centos 4.4 using 0.22.3 After initiating contact with puppetd --test --server=puppet.myclient.com, I see the CSR on the server. After signing it, and running puppet again, I get the signed certificate, but also see: err: Could not retrieve configuration: Certificates were not trusted:

Hi John. > I am putting this information > into my temp. wiki page in hopes of getting it into the dev wiki when > that is available. The dev wiki is up at its temporary name http://google2.osuosl.org/wiki/. Feel free to dump your stuff on there. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 7:43 PM, John Mosby <ojomojo at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Evan, > Thanks very much for the review, I am

Hi llvmdev, I'm trying to figure how llvm remembers stack slots allotted to callee saved registers on x86. In particular, llvm pushes registers in decreasing order of FrameIdxs [1], so the offsets they get (as returned by MFI->getObjectOffset) don't directly correspond to their actual stack locations. In X86FrameLowering's emitCalleeSavedFrameMoves, when emitting DWARF

On 31.5.2014 2:04, Pasi Parviainen wrote: > On 28.5.2014 2:57, Sanjoy Das wrote: >> Hi llvmdev, >> >> I'm trying to figure how llvm remembers stack slots allotted to callee >> saved registers on x86. In particular, llvm pushes registers in >> decreasing order of FrameIdxs [1], so the offsets they get (as >> returned by MFI->getObjectOffset) don't

Hey, I'm playing around with a backend with no callee saved registers and noticed more spilling than seems needed. I tried digging into the spilling code but with limited success. I also tried removing all the callee saved registers in the X86 backend and saw the same effect (basically making CSRs equal to CSR_NoRegs). So I seem to be misunderstanding something or missing something simple,

Hi Evan, Thanks very much for the review, I am implementing your suggestions today and will have the next patch together this weekend. A few questions/comments: On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com> wrote: > > 1. Some of the functions that you introduced, e.g. stringifyCSRegSet > probably ought to be "static" and ifdef'ed out when NDEBUG