similar to: [LLVMdev] RE: Instruction selection framework

Hi, In the directory of lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG, I cann't find SelectionDAGISel.cpp. I only have DAGBuilder.cpp and SelectionDAG.cpp. I don't know why. My edtion is 1.4. Is it because of the edtion difference? Thanks! > On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 shding at mtu.edu wrote: >> I have extended the IR for adding flag. But I just want this flag to >> pass through the backend

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 shding at mtu.edu wrote: > I have extended the IR for adding flag. But I just want this flag to > pass through the backend machine code. I know there're several passes > like register relocation, schedualing, etc. But I think I just miss the > part which is used to "parser" the LLVM IR to machine code > instructions. The part of the code

* Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 11:07:46AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 03:53:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote: > > > > On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 11:18:06AM

Hi Segher, On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 3:48 PM Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 10:06:02AM +0100, Boris Petkov wrote: > > On November 29, 2018 1:25:02 PM GMT+01:00, Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > >This will only be fixed from GCC 9 on, if the compiler adopts it. The > >

Hi. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:14 AM Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 11:07:46AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 03:53:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote: > > > > On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > >

Hi. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:14 AM Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 11:07:46AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 03:53:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote: > > > > On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > >

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 08:22:28AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > GCC already estimates the *size* of inline asm, and this is required > *for correctness*. I didn't say it didn't - but the heuristic could use improving. > So I guess the real issue is that the inline asm size estimate for x86 > isn't very good (since it has to be pessimistic, and x86 insns can be >

Revert the following 9 commits: [1] 5bdcd510c2ac ("x86/jump-labels: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC inlining bugs") This was partially reverted because it made good cleanups irrespective of the inlining issue; the error message is still unneeded, and the conversion to STATIC_BRANCH_{NOP,JUMP} should be kept. [2] d5a581d84ae6 ("x86/cpufeature:

I couldn't resist: izeof(synth_buffs) = sizeof(float)*2*2*0x120 = 4 * 4 * 0x120 = 0x1200 = 4608 -Anish > -----Original Message----- > From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:segher@chello.nl] > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 6:34 PM > To: vorbis-dev@xiph.org > Subject: Re: [vorbis-dev] ogg vorbis dynamic memory allocation. > > > > > Firelight Multimedia wrote: >

Thread-split from the vorbis-mailing list ("Vorbis determined to be as good as MPC at 128 kbps!") <p>On Sun, 30 May 2004, Segher Boessenkool wrote: [Steven So] SS>> If iTunes AAC can encode castanets with much less pre-echo at SS>> ABR 128 kbps, then hopefully there will be an imaginative SS>> (and non-patented) way of doing this in Vorbis without the SS>>

Revert the following commits: - 5bdcd510c2ac9efaf55c4cbd8d46421d8e2320cd ("x86/jump-labels: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC inlining bugs") - d5a581d84ae6b8a4a740464b80d8d9cf1e7947b2 ("x86/cpufeature: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC inlining bugs") - 0474d5d9d2f7f3b11262f7bf87d0e7314ead9200. ("x86/extable: Macrofy inline assembly

Revert the following commits: - 5bdcd510c2ac9efaf55c4cbd8d46421d8e2320cd ("x86/jump-labels: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC inlining bugs") - d5a581d84ae6b8a4a740464b80d8d9cf1e7947b2 ("x86/cpufeature: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC inlining bugs") - 0474d5d9d2f7f3b11262f7bf87d0e7314ead9200. ("x86/extable: Macrofy inline assembly

* Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > > More precise *size* estimates, yes. And if the user lies he should not > > > be surprised to get assembler errors, etc. > > > > Yes. > > > > Another option would be if gcc parses the inline asm directly and > > does a more precise size estimation. Which is a lot more involved

On November 29, 2018 1:25:02 PM GMT+01:00, Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: >This will only be fixed from GCC 9 on, if the compiler adopts it. The >kernel wants to support ancient GCC, so it will need to have a >workaround >for older GCC versions anyway. What about backporting it, like Richard says? -- Sent from a small device: formatting sux and

Quoting Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>: > > I wonder if there's a way to "weak-link" against libraries on > > Linux/GNU-ld-so? The idea is that a symbol lookup/relocation isn't > > performed until the call is actually MADE, rather than merely > > referenced. > > That's the default behaviour. No it's not. The

Me again, this time not about patents but about wavelets. I've been doing some work on an image compression method which uses Haar wavelets plus VQ and entropy coding, and Segher Boessenkool told me in a private message that you are also doing a video codec. So I searched the archives and read a bunch of posts, but I never did find out any web address. And it's not on xiph.org either. So

I would like to see the following information added to the FAQ at vorbis.com, appended to the "Audio Quality" section. "Uiver," "boa," and "jonI" from OPN's #Vorbis channel contributed and reviewed it. "What does the 'quality' setting mean?" Beginning with vorbislib 1.0-rc3, audio quality is no longer measured in kilobits per

Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> I noticed that you changed all constant floating point numbers >> from double notation (e.g. 3.0) to float notation (3.0f) in the latest >> version >> of Speex (in subversion). >> Did that give any performance increase (because of elimination of the >> float to double and double to float conversions)? > > > It does, with

Greetings, I thought this was supposed to be a list for educated people to discuss serious development of the ogg vorbis project. In light of that, it is amazing to see the level Mr. Segher Boessenkool drops down to in the last posts. More or less calling people insane and accusing them of being on crack and what not. I didn't want to post this on the list, for there is no reason to

Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > I have updated TableGen to support a new format for instruction selection patterns. > > Before: > > def : Pat<(subc IntRegs:$b, IntRegs:$c), (SUBCCrr IntRegs:$b, IntRegs:$c)>; > > After: > > def : Pat<(subc i32:$b, i32:$c), (SUBCCrr $b, $c)>; > > Since the pattern matching happens on a DAG with type labels, not