similar to: [LLVMdev] New RAW bytecode files for a couple spec benchmarks

Hi, I have looked at the LLVM code generation quality using small test cases and in general it is better than I thought and in some cases better than gcc. However, there are still some gap in SPEC performance. I have not looked at the root cause of those gaps. Anyone who cares about LLVM performance need to take this seriously. For fair comparison, I used -fno-strict-aliasing in gcc to turn off

Thanks David. Unfortunately many of us cannot use GPL v3 gcc so it's hard for us to investigate this. One question, can you tell if gcc is inlining significantly more than llvm? We have reports that this is one of the issue plaguing eon performance. There are also some relatively well known spec optimizations that we haven't implemented. e.g.

Friday I enabled the inlinehint function attribute in the inliner. It mostly affects the performance of -Os compiled code. I have made some measurements on the SPEC test suite to show what it means. I made three runs of then nightly tests. The baseline represents -Os with no inlinehint: make TEST=nightly OPTFLAGS=-Os EXTRA_LOPT_OPTIONS=-inlinehint-threshold=0

Hi, guys, I am comparing the performance of the default scheduler (seems to be the one that minimizes register pressure) with no scheduler (-pre-RA-sched=none), and I got these numbers. The ratio is low_reg_pressure/none, that is, the lower the number, the better the performance with low register pressure: CFP2000/177.mesa/177.mesa 1.00 CFP2000/179.art/179.art

Perhaps you noticed that LLVM gained a new optimizing register allocator yesterday (r130568). Linear scan is going away, and RAGreedy is the new default for optimizing builds. Hopefully, you noticed because your binaries were suddenly 2% smaller and 10% faster*. Some noticed because LLVM started crashing or miscompiling their code. Greedy replaces a fairly big chunk of the code generator, so

The project that I use to test LLVM against showed that currently llvm-ld doesn't honor the -Ox switch. $ /usr/src/llvm/dist/bin/llvm-ld \ -v -stats -native -O1 -strip-all \ -o main \ -L/usr/share/qt3/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib \ -lcrypto -lusb -lutil -lqt-mt -lXext -lX11 -lm -lpthread ... $ size main text data bss dec hex filename 1128271 71980 8392 1208643 127143

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Vikram S. Adve wrote: >> The second issue is that we need to do redundancy elimination and hoisting >> on operations that are only exposed once instruction selection is >> performed. Getelementptr expansion is just ONE particular case of this, >> but it can happen with any instructions (including the use of large integer >> (or any FP)

On Mar 16, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Eric Kidd wrote: >> The duplicate loads appear at the top of the %regex6 and %regex2 >> blocks below. I've tried various alias analysis implementations >> either alone or in combination. > > LICM doesn't remove common subexpressions, also -load-vn doesn't > affect LICM. Try

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Eric Kidd wrote: > Hello! I'm compiling code which uses pointers as iterators. For some > reason--probably a silly misunderstanding of the docs--I can't eliminate > duplicate pointer loads. I'll probably figure this out eventually, but if > somebody else sees the answer instantly, I certainly won't complain. :-) There are no stupid questions.

> > Now the problem is obvious.  A two dimensional array access is being > performed by a single instruction.  The arithmetic needed to address > the element is implicit, and therefore inaccessible to optimizations.  > The redundant calculations can not be eliminated, nor can strength > reduction be performed.  getelementptr needs to be broken down into > its constituent

I figured getelementptr exists as it does to facilitate data flow analysis, but it does need to be broken down before instruction selection. It's not just the missed optimization opportunities. It also introduces a huge amount of complexity into instruction selection as they deal with its complexity. It would also take care of many of the FIXMEs in LoopStrengthReduce. Vikram Adve

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I figured getelementptr exists as it does to facilitate data flow analysis, > but it does need to be broken down before instruction selection. It's not > just the missed optimization opportunities. It also introduces a huge amount > of complexity into instruction selection as they deal with its complexity. > It would also take care

Hi, I've restarted my Elsa/LLVM project after three months of having real life intrude. I upgraded my LLVM source to the current trunk. I had to make a few changes to my source, e.g. LLVMFoldingBuilder became IRBuilder and several instances of "new" became "Create". Now, a test case that previously succeeded fails. I run the following script: #!/bin/sh if [ 1 -ne 0 ]

Hi, In my experiments, I need to disable several linking optimizations. However, bzip2, vortex and eon failed if "-disable-opt" was passed to gccld. I tried the out-of-box llvm and the building process provided by llvm-test. The same problem was observed, when I specified EXTRA_LINKTIME_OPT_FLAGS = -disable-opt on Makefile.program and simplied typed "make" under

Optimization passes running before LoopVectorizer should be able to combine the two statements (this should be happening in O1. Pls check) arr[i] = a + i sum += arr[i] to sum += a + i Not sure, why are you using the array there. - Suyog On 4 May 2015 23:11, "Michael Zolotukhin" <mzolotukhin at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Yaduveer, > > Vectorizer probably fails because it

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 02:32:25AM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > Ok, after pasting the output from "gccas -debug-pass=Arguments > </dev/null -o - >/dev/null" I get the following: > > bugpoint -verify -lowersetjmp -funcresolve -raiseallocs -simplifycfg > -mem2reg -globalopt -globaldce -ipconstprop -deadargelim -instcombine > -simplifycfg -prune-eh

Hi Folks, Anyone got chance to review the patch adding X32 psABI support? Yours - Michael -----Original Message----- From: llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Liao, Michael Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 11:18 AM To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re:

If you are interesting to play around X32, you may refer to http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/x32 to bootstrap a local environment on Linux. Yours - Michael -----Original Message----- From: cfe-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:cfe-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Liao, Michael Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 5:09 PM To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Michelle Strout wrote: > I plan on responding to your email to the various mailing lists, but > first I want to run something past you. Ok, email the lists is preferred though, because then there is an archive, and others with similar questions can get them answered that way. I'm CC'ing the list because some of the info in my response may be useful to others.

I have been having problems trying to get my samba mounted windows (XP) shares to mount at boot time on my Redhat 8 machine. I have tried changing the start order of things, but it didn't seem to help. Here is the interesting bits from the boot.log Feb 1 11:17:46 vortex-550 network: Setting network parameters: succeeded Feb 1 11:17:46 vortex-550 network: Bringing up loopback interface: