similar to: [LLVMdev] Problems with Olden

On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Chris Lattner wrote: > Olden itself doesn't need it. _Compiling_ Olden requires the assembler to > turn llvm .s files into llvm .o files. Why not just use the bytecode > files that Misha posted? Right now I can't even get the LLVM assembly file to produce from Olden. The bytecodes that Misha posted are some ancient Olden version that doesn't work

On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Chris Lattner wrote: > > For each bmk, the undefined symbols are coming from args.c as far as I can > > tell. Do I need to link in args.c's bc file for each of them or am I > > doing something terribly wrong? > > These benchmarks were compile a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. > In this galaxy, uninitialized globals (int X;) were handled

When I try to compile the olden bc's off the webpage I am getting undefined symbols. My compile script works as follows: #!/bin/sh echo "Generating assembly file." llc -f $1.bc echo "Assembling s file." /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc -xarch=v9 -lm $1.s -o $1 echo "Removing s file." rm $1.s and here is an example of the symbol issues: Undefined first referenced symbol

Hi, Below you can see the updated benchmark results for the new SLP-vectorizer. As you can see, there is a small number of compile time regressions, a single major runtime *regression, and many performance gains. There is a tiny increase in code size: 30k for the whole test-suite. Based on the numbers below I would like to enable the SLP-vectorizer by default for -O3. Please let me know if you

Hi, LLVM’s SLP-vectorizer is a new pass that combines similar independent instructions in a straight-line code. It is currently not enabled by default, and people who want to experiment with it can use the clang command line flag “-fslp-vectorize”. I ran LLVM’s test suite with and without the SLP vectorizer on a Sandybridge mac (using SSE4, w/o AVX). Based on my performance measurements

On Jul 13, 2013, at 11:30 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > LLVM’s SLP-vectorizer is a new pass that combines similar independent instructions in a straight-line code. It is currently not enabled by default, and people who want to experiment with it can use the clang command line flag “-fslp-vectorize”. I ran LLVM’s test suite with and without the SLP

Hi, Sorry for the delay in response. I measured the code size change and noticed small changes in both directions for individual programs. I found a 30k binary size growth for the entire testsuite + SPEC. I attached an updated performance report that includes both compile time and performance measurements. Thanks, Nadav On Jul 14, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com>

On Jul 14, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2013, at 11:30 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> LLVM’s SLP-vectorizer is a new pass that combines similar independent instructions in a straight-line code. It is currently not enabled by default, and people who want to experiment with it

What exactly does Olden require from 'as'. I can't build the entire 'as' because there's no more disk space left. Wojciech

Hello; I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the ./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the --enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with llvmgcc source/binaries and I

Hi I'm trying to compile the "bh" C program from the Olden benchmark to one bc file. # compile source files into an LLVM bitcode file llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c args.c -o args.bc -w -DTORONTO llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c newbh.c -o newbh.bc -w -DTORONTO llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c util.c -o util.bc -w -DTORONTO llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -c walksub.c -o walksub.bc -w -DTORONTO # To link files together

Sorry for not posting sooner. I forgot to send an update with the results. I also have some benchmark data. It confirms much of what you posted -- binary size increase is essentially 0, performance increases across the board. It looks really good to me. However, there was one crash that I'd like to check if it still fires. Will update later today (feel free to ping me if you don't hear

I updated my source tree and after putting malloc.h back things look a lot better. Still getting a large number of JIT-only failures. There is now only one assertion failure: /home/cfe/x86/llvm-gcc/bin/g++ -I/usr/home/llvm/obj/projects/llvm-test/MultiSource/Benchmarks/Prolangs-C++/city -I/usr/home/llvm/obj/projects/llvm-test/../../../projects/llvm-test/MultiSource/Benchmarks/Prolangs-C++/city

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I updated my source tree and after putting malloc.h back things look a lot better. Still getting a large number of JIT-only failures. There is now only one assertion failure: > > /home/cfe/x86/llvm-gcc/bin/g++ -I/usr/home/llvm/obj/projects/llvm-test/MultiSource/Benchmarks/Prolangs-C++/city

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I am compiling SPEC 2000 benchmarks with llvm .Got stuck with > calculating "execution time" of all the .bc and native files. > > The log for nightly test itself gives execution times but I am passing > the bytecode files to my pass which gives another bytecode file.I have > to calculate execution time of such bytecode and

does anyone knows how to get the Olden BM bytecode files? We're low on disk space and I don't want to build the whole test branch (even if i can, which I doubt, it failed last time i tried).

Cool! What changes have you seen to generated code size? I'll take it for a spin on our benchmarks. On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > LLVM’s SLP-vectorizer is a new pass that combines similar independent > instructions in a straight-line code. It is currently not enabled by > default, and people who want to

G'Day Tanya, Is it too late to bring in the following patches to fix some major brokenness in the AuroraUX tool chain for 2.6? http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Tools.cpp?r1=84468&r2=84469&view=diff&pathrev=84469 http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Tools.cpp?r1=84265&r2=84266&view=diff&pathrev=84266

On Apr 16, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Does sinking these into the DAGCombine layer help? How much does it break? I tried disabling just the InstCombine transforms that hide shl instructions behind bitmasks. Even though DAGCombine has the same transforms, it causes some pretty bad regressions: External/SPEC/CINT95/147_vortex/147_vortex

The new Olden benchmark bytecodes Misha generated are in the standard place: > Perhaps Chris could copy them into the standard place? Done: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/LLVMPrograms/Olden -Chris > > The files I linked to the second time > > (http://tank.cs.uiuc.edu/Olden) are hot off > the presses: I > > compiled them just recently today. So far, only 2 of them give me