Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "[RFC] Stop giving a default CPU to the LTO plugin?"
2018 Mar 15
0
[RFC] Stop giving a default CPU to the LTO plugin?
On 3/15/2018 9:43 AM, Peter Smith via llvm-dev wrote:
> Hello everyone, this is most likely Arm specific, but could affect
> other targets where there is a somewhat complex relationship between
> the triple and mcpu option.
>
> At present when clang is used as a linker driver for the gold-plugin
> and when using and an explicit -mcpu is not given to clang, then clang
> will
2018 Mar 16
2
[RFC] Stop giving a default CPU to the LTO plugin?
Thanks for the example, that is very useful in working out the overall
scope of the problem, which is now wider than I thought it was. I've
put some comments inline.
On 15 March 2018 at 19:12, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 3/15/2018 9:43 AM, Peter Smith via llvm-dev wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone, this is most likely Arm specific, but could affect
2018 Mar 16
0
[RFC] Stop giving a default CPU to the LTO plugin?
On 16 March 2018 at 10:38, Peter Smith via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 15 March 2018 at 19:12, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Having ARMv7a instructions in an ARMv4t file shouldn't be a problem: a
>> function should be allowed to override the CPU attributes to generate code
>> for a newer target. This is generally
2013 Feb 08
2
[LLVMdev] JIT on armhf
On 08/02/13 14:42, Renato Golin wrote:
[...]
> Can you paste the result of a "clang -v -mcpu=CPU file.c" on your box? I
> want to see what are the arguments and the assembler/linker it's
> choosing to use. What CPU are we talking about?
The box itself is an Allwinner A10; armv7l. /proc/cpuinfo says it's got
swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3.
I've been
2013 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] JIT on armhf
On 8 February 2013 14:28, David Given <dg at cowlark.com> wrote:
> Debian's clang packages are totally broken on armhf --- the compiler
> emits a confused warning about the platform being unrecognised, and then
> generates softfloat code --- so I was wondering about LLVM itself.
I'm using Ubuntu on Pandas and Chromebooks and LLVM itself behaves well,
with the right set of
2013 Feb 09
0
[LLVMdev] JIT on armhf
On 8 February 2013 21:42, David Given <dg at cowlark.com> wrote:
> The box itself is an Allwinner A10; armv7l. /proc/cpuinfo says it's got
> swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3.
>
Yes, it's a Cortex-A8.
I've been unable to find any values for CPU which are accepted (it just
> says 'unknown target CPU'. I've tried arm, armv7, armv7a, armv7l,
2013 Feb 08
6
[LLVMdev] JIT on armhf
Renato Golin wrote:
[...]
> Try setting armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf and see if it works better.
No, that doesn't work either.
[...]
> JIT was never the forte of ARM and I haven't tried yet, but I doubt
> it'll be any Debian misconfiguration. The whole architecture
> configuration is a bit odd...
Debian's clang packages are totally broken on armhf --- the compiler
2012 May 11
4
[LLVMdev] Request for Help: Teach ARM target to auto-detect cpu / subtarget features
On 11/05/12 04:56, 陳韋任 wrote:
>> I've just filed PR12794: Add ARM cpu / subtarget features auto-detection. And I would very much appreciate the community's help to implement this.
>>
>> What motivated this? Well this:
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTA5OTM
>>
>> I believe one of the reason the benchmark numbers are totally
2010 Jan 10
2
[LLVMdev] building a llvm-arm-elf crosscompiler on OSX 10.5
Dear Anton,
Thank you again for your help!
I tried with the following options (adding --with-cpu=arm7tdmi and
using binutils from cvs snapshot):
../llvm-gcc4.2-2.6.source/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/cross-llvm-gcc-arm-elf-4.2-2.6
--program-prefix=llvm-
--enable-llvm=/Users/dummy/Develop/llvm/llvm-build
--enable-languages=c,c++ --host=i686-apple-darwin9
--build=i686-apple-darwin9
2010 Jan 10
1
[LLVMdev] building a llvm-arm-elf crosscompiler on OSX 10.5
Dear ML,
Anton, Thank you for your answer and your help.
I had a look at ARM.td of LLVM 2.6 (in lib/Target/ARM..) where I found
following definitions:
// V4T Processors.
def : ProcNoItin<"arm7tdmi", [ArchV4T]>;
def : ProcNoItin<"arm7tdmi-s", [ArchV4T]>;
def : ProcNoItin<"arm710t", [ArchV4T]>;
def :
2012 May 11
0
[LLVMdev] Request for Help: Teach ARM target to auto-detect cpu / subtarget features
On May 11, 2012, at 12:25 AM, James Molloy wrote:
> On 11/05/12 04:56, 陳韋任 wrote:
>>> I've just filed PR12794: Add ARM cpu / subtarget features auto-detection. And I would very much appreciate the community's help to implement this.
>>>
>>> What motivated this? Well this:
>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTA5OTM
2010 Jan 10
0
[LLVMdev] building a llvm-arm-elf crosscompiler on OSX 10.5
Hello, Pazzo
> Any clue?
Yes. Sorry, my fault - next time I should check ARM docs before replying.
ARM7TDMI is ARMv4T and this is not supported by LLVM (LLVM does v5+ codegen).
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
2016 Nov 30
3
Loop Vectorize: Testing cost model driven transformations
That's right. In your example, if the target isn't specified anywhere, an
llc invocation would be equivalent to "llc
-mtriple=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -mcpu=generic". TTI queries (in e.g.,
CodeGenPrepare) would be based on this. From opt, if the target triple is
left unspecified, we will use the "base" TTI implementation (not x86).
-- Matt
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:07
2011 Oct 13
0
[LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer
Well how about as a strawman... taking some options from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ARM_microprocessor_cores and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_applications_of_ARM_cores
LLVM Supports:
ARMv4T -> ARM7TDMI
ARMv5TE -> ARM926EJ-S
-> XScale
ARMv6 -> ARM1136J(F)-S
ARMv6ZK -> ARM1176JZ(F)-S
ARMv7A -> Cortex-A8
Cortex-A9
ARMv7M -> Cortex-M3
2013 Nov 27
3
[LLVMdev] Targeting ARM Cortex-a9 from x86_64 with clang
On 26 November 2013 16:44, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 26 November 2013 15:36, Rob Stewart <robstewart57 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> $ clang -v -target armv7a-linux-eabi -mcpu=cortex-a9 -mfloat-abi=soft
>> -mfpu=neon helloworld.c
>
> Hi Rod,
I'm honoured. (But Rob is also OK) :-)
> You need cross-binutils installed on your
2008 Mar 20
2
[LLVMdev] arm code generation
Hello,
I'm trying to do the following and encountering problems with the
generated arm assembly code:
I've got an application in two parts that i've compiled into llvm
bitcode using:
llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c part1.c -o part1.bc
llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c part2.c -o part2.bc
Then I link them together:
llvm-ld part1.bc part2.bc -o combined.bc
Now I use the ARM backend via llc to
2012 Jul 05
2
[LLVMdev] Vector argument passing abi for ARM ?
Hi all,
I was wondering if there is a defined ABI for passing vector as parameter for ARM target.
For instance is this valid to write .ll statement like:
; ModuleID = 'bugconv.ll'
target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-n32"
target triple = "thumbv7-none-linux-androideabi"
define
2012 May 11
2
[LLVMdev] Request for Help: Teach ARM target to auto-detect cpu / subtarget features
Hi all,
I've just filed PR12794: Add ARM cpu / subtarget features auto-detection. And I would very much appreciate the community's help to implement this.
What motivated this? Well this:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTA5OTM
I believe one of the reason the benchmark numbers are totally bogus is that the compilation are done on ARM hosts. Given the benchmarks are
2012 Jul 05
2
[LLVMdev] RE : Vector argument passing abi for ARM ?
Hi Duncan,
I also thought it was a bug, especially since it worked with LLVM 3.0, but since it is not defined by ABI, I was not sure if I need to submit it as a BUG.
I wanted to be sure that it is an actual BUG before submitting it and got the not-a-bug answer.
Here is a small example to reproduce the problem I'm experiencing:
; ModuleID = 'bugparam.ll'
target datalayout =
2017 Sep 26
2
Difference between -mattr=+soft-float and -float-abi=soft
Hi,
I’ve run into a case where `llc -mattr=+soft-float` for
"armv7-unknown-linux-androideabi” segfaults, while
`llc -float-abi=soft` does not. Similarly if the
"target-features"="+soft-float” metadata is embedded,
llc segfaults.
I fear I’m missing something rather subtle here, could
someone help me understand the differences?
Cheers,
Moritz