similar to: Fwd: Re: [LLVMdev] new IA64 backend

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Fwd: Re: [LLVMdev] new IA64 backend"

2005 Mar 17
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote: > I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM! Woo hoo! And There Was Much Rejoicing in IA64 Land :-). -- Ciao, al ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Al Stone Alter Ego: Linux & Open Source Lab Debian Developer Hewlett-Packard
2005 Mar 17
4
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
Hi everyone, I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM! Be warned, it's pretty rough right now. Here are some of the known defects: - No varargs - No alloca - No instruction scheduling/bundling of any sort ...or in other words, it breaks often and when it does work, it's a dog. On the plus side, it _does_ have a tasty new pattern instruction selector. :) Beyond fixing the
2004 Dec 30
0
[LLVMdev] Primer with LLVM
On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 11:14, Francisco Puentes wrote: > Hi, everybody: > Hi Francisco > > I am a beginner with LLVM, in fact today was the first day that I use it. Welcome! > > I have several questions about LLVM: If you haven't already, a good place to start is the Getting Started Guide, at http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GettingStarted.html > Can I use LLVM to
2005 May 11
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.5 Release Plan
Hello Duraid, Duraid Madina wrote on Wednesday, 11 May 2005: >> I've just tried building CVS/HEAD of llvm using gcc 4.0.0 that I >> have installed to /opt/gcc > ... then you should either add /opt/gcc/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and > rerun ldconfig, or add /opt/gcc/lib to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH . > However, GCC 4.x definitely has issues building LLVM, at least on > ia64. Oh,
2005 Mar 17
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM! Be warned, it's pretty > rough right now. Here are some of the known defects: > > - No varargs What are your issues here? Or are they simply at the "not implemented so I don't know" stage? Namely, I am working on some varargs
2005 Mar 18
2
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
Andrew Lenharth wrote: > On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote: >> - No varargs > > What are your issues here? Or are they simply at the "not implemented > so I don't know" stage? The two bugs I mentioned (no varargs, no alloca) are pretty much two sides of the same coin: I'm ignoring the IA64 stack frame layout (for no good reason), so
2005 May 11
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.5 Release Plan
Oleg Smolsky wrote: > I've just tried building CVS/HEAD of llvm using gcc 4.0.0 that I have > installed to /opt/gcc ... then you should either add /opt/gcc/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and rerun ldconfig, or add /opt/gcc/lib to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH . However, GCC 4.x definitely has issues building LLVM, at least on ia64. If you want to use LLVM in anger, I'd stick with 3.4 for now.
2005 May 25
3
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
You are right, the machine I am on is a AMD Opteron. I could probably generate working code for x86, but I am testing the implications of using 64 bits integers. The four weeks is not really important, it's just that it would be nice to have really fast code to showcase. Something related to this: to test the effect of 64 bits integers I replace all reference of int by long in my .ll file.
2004 Nov 30
2
[LLVMdev] dejagnu tester
Hi all, This is just to announce that I have a FreeBSD x86 machine running the test suite more or less continuously: http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~builddonkey/ Of note is that it now runs Dejagnu tests. (Thanks, tonic+co!) I'm also tracking CVS breakage (internally, for now). At some later point, I'll make available more real-time information on "is CVS alive and if not,
2004 Dec 30
3
[LLVMdev] Primer with LLVM
Hi, everybody: I am a beginner with LLVM, in fact today was the first day that I use it. I have several questions about LLVM: Can I use LLVM to compile several files (bytecode), scripts (char*) and link them with external libraries generating *only* one executable (all in memory)? Can I invoke externals functions from a guest (LLVM generated) code which exist in the host code (the code that
2005 Mar 18
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Duraid Madina wrote: >>> - No instruction scheduling/bundling of any sort >> >> So this one needs to be coordinated. Next week, I might see about >> adding MachineInstruction support to the SelectionDAG so you can load up >> a DAG post-ISel and then spit it back out scheduled. > > That would be much appreciated, particularly if it
2005 May 25
0
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
Hi there, The IA64 architecture, which had its 'official' name changed to the "Itanium Processor Architecture", *is* supported by llc. I am pretty sure you are talking about the x86-64 architecture, which has also had its share of unfortunate name changes and is also known as "AMD64", "EM64T" and all sorts of things in between. x86-64 is *not* currently
2005 May 18
0
[LLVMdev] Testing Release 1.5
> Itanium Everything checks out as expected. :) Duraid
2005 Jan 10
4
[LLVMdev] Version Control Upgrade?
I have used Perforce also and fully agree it's wonderful. The only concern I have is with their license for open source projects. The only gotcha is that it must be renewed annually, and they reserve the right to not renew it (though they say they won't unreasonably deny renewals). Not sure how much this really matters, as Perforce strikes me as being one of those "do no
2005 May 25
2
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
Hi, For the PyPy project ( http://codespeak.net/pypy ) I am working on the x64-64 support. I would like to use llc -march=ia64 to generate the assembly but that is not supported at the moment. As a workaround I let llc generate C code that gets compiled, but this unfortunately is not a good way to show the power of llvm. A understood this ia64 support will be worked on soon. First week of july
2005 Nov 07
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM versus Intel's PIN tool
Hi Vasanth, Can you be a little more precise about what you mean by "dynamic optimization"? In one sense, neither LLVM nor Pin are dynamic optimization tools per se - LLVM is more of a compiler(-building) suite while Pin is an instrumentation toolkit. > 1. I should be able to run all the Spec 2000 and Spec 95 floating point > and integer benchmarks. LLVM will do this - if it
2006 Aug 19
1
[LLVMdev] a target must have floating point support?
> The assert is at TargetLowering.cpp:138. > > Why is FP required? There's no particularly fundamental reason - while LLVM specifies a modest set of FP capabilities... > Most ARMs don't have an FPU. Should I add a fake > register class for MVT::f64? ...nothing will break if you just pretend f64 fits in your integer registers so long as you don't go anywhere near FP in
2005 Feb 14
0
LLVM February Status Update
Hi Everyone, Sorry for the long overdue status update, as you might guess, the holidays have been busy for everyone. :) Here's your periodic dose of updates on the progress of LLVM, which takes us from the LLVM 1.4 release until present CVS. I appologize if I forgot anything! Big Things: 1. Brian contributed a new SparcV8 backend, which (unlike the SparcV9 backend) uses the
2011 Jan 12
1
GLMM with lme4 and octopus behaviour
Hi all, First time poster and a relatively new R user, I'm beginning analysis for my masters degree. I'm doing a bit of work on octopus behaviour, and while it's been fascinating, the stats behind it are a bit beyond my grasp at the moment. I was hoping that somebody with more experience my be able to look at my example and offer their wisdom, much to my appreciation :-) At the most
2005 Jan 09
0
[LLVMdev] Version Control Upgrade?
Hi everyone, Reid said: > Of the tools available, it seems that only subversion, arch, and > monotone are suitable for our purposes. But, we'd love to hear your > thoughts; especially if you have first-hand experience with these tools. Apart from using CVS as a client (as everyone does), I've only ever used Aegis (previous employer, for ~3 years) and Perforce (the employer