Displaying 20 results from an estimated 60000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [DRAFT] LLVM 1.7 release announcement notes [DRAFT]"
2006 Apr 20
0
[LLVMdev] [DRAFT] LLVM 1.7 release announcement notes [DRAFT]
Feedback below..
> <will insert overview blurb here> Big new things: llvm-gcc4, new sparc
> backend, Generic vector/SSE/Altivec support, X86 Scalar SSE support,
> debugging support, many target-independent codegen improvements, inline asm,
> llvm.org/web-reg.
>
>
> Core LLVM IR Improvements:
>
> * The LLVM IR now has full support for representing
2006 Apr 20
0
LLVM 1.7 Release!
LLVM 1.7 is available now! Download it here: http://llvm.org/releases/
Release notes here: http://llvm.org/releases/1.7/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
This release is huge! It contains about twice the number of new features
as any previous release, and includes some big-ticket items that people
have been requesting for a long time.
In particular, this release contains a completely rewritten llvm-gcc
2006 Apr 19
4
[LLVMdev] First draft of release notes done
Please take a look:
http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
-Chris
--
http://nondot.org/sabre/
http://llvm.org/
2005 Oct 26
4
[LLVMdev] [DRAFT] Announcement for LLVM 1.6 [DRAFT]
Hi All,
I'm putting together the announcement for the LLVM 1.6 release. Here is
what I have so far. Because so much has been done, it is very likely that
I have forgotten something. If you have done something that is not on the
list, please send me a private email so I can add it (also, please tell
me if I've made a mistake or miscredited something)!
My next project is to start
2005 Nov 03
0
[LLVMdev] [DRAFT] Announcement for LLVM 1.6 [DRAFT]
The vector LLVA extension will not be merged into the 1.6 release branch?
It will make me have to merge twice: one for 1.6 and one for vector LLVA.
When do you plan to merge the vector LLVA to the main trunk, please?
On 26/10/05, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm putting together the announcement for the LLVM 1.6 release. Here is
> what I
2006 Apr 20
0
[LLVMdev] First draft of release notes done
Chris,
Here's my review notes:
1. In the Known problems section you identify PR656 as a known problem.
However, this bug is resolved and in January you reported that you
verified it on Solaris. So, one of two things needs to happen. Either
remove this item from the release notes, or re-open the bug and tell me
what still breaks.
2. It seems that several items from the original DRAFT email
2008 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] VFCmp failing when unordered or UnsafeFPMath on x86
On Jun 13, 2008, at 12:27 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When trying to generate a VFCmp instruction when UnsafeFPMath is set
> to true I get an assert “Unexpected CondCode” on my x86 system. This
> also happens with UnsafeFPMath set to false and using an unordered
> compare. Could someone look into this?
Have you filed a bug?
>
> While I’m at it, is there
2006 Aug 02
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.8 Release Announcement [draft]
Hi All,
Here are my notes for the LLVM 1.8 release, please send me feedback :).
I'm sure I've forgotten and overlooked something, if so, please let me
know!
<Note: we're back to 3-month release cycle: yay!>
----- 8< ----- 8< -----
High Level Changes:
*. Jim has finished enough support for DWARF debugging information that it is
now enabled by default in
2006 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.9 Release Announcement [draft #1]
Hi All,
Here's the first draft of the release announcement for LLVM 1.9 that
I'm working on. I'm sure I've forgotten and overlooked something, if
so,
please let me know!
----- 8< ------ 8< -----
<notes>
Note: LLVM now correctly builds itself and passes all regression
tests on
Darwin X86 and Darwin PPC. No one has tried other targets to my
knowledge.
We hit
2008 Jun 13
6
[LLVMdev] VFCmp failing when unordered or UnsafeFPMath on x86
Hi all,
When trying to generate a VFCmp instruction when UnsafeFPMath is set to true
I get an assert "Unexpected CondCode" on my x86 system. This also happens
with UnsafeFPMath set to false and using an unordered compare. Could someone
look into this?
While I'm at it, is there any reason why only the most significant bit of
the return value of VFCmp is defined (according to
2007 May 14
3
[LLVMdev] llvm 2.0 release announcement [draft]
Hi Everyone,
It is getting to be that time again. I've scoured llvm-commits and
collected a list of some of the major features we've developed since
the last status update (from Feb 21). Please take a look and send me
(off list) additions, feedback, corrections, etc. As usual, if I
missed something, it's probably because there is such a huge amount
of stuff happening,
2008 Apr 16
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: PowerPC tail call optimization patch
Hello Dale,
this is an updated version of the tail call optimization patch for
powerpc. could you have a look at it?
i added code to support ppc64 (untested, will try to get access to
ppc64 on a friend's machine).
incorporated evan's formatting suggestions. ;)
will run another round of testing (llvm-test) on my powerpc g4/800
when i get the okay to commit. testing on this machine takes
2006 Aug 09
0
LLVM 1.8 Release!
LLVM 1.8 is available now! Download it here: http://llvm.org/releases/
Release notes here: http://llvm.org/releases/1.8/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
This is a great new release with great new features and lots of
refinements (better codegen, faster compiles, bugs fixed). One
particularly nice feature of this release is that we're back to a regular
3-month release cycle, allowing users to have
2008 Apr 21
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: PowerPC tail call optimization patch
On Apr 16, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote:
> Hello Dale,
>
> this is an updated version of the tail call optimization patch for
> powerpc. could you have a look at it?
>
> i added code to support ppc64 (untested, will try to get access to
> ppc64 on a friend's machine).
> incorporated evan's formatting suggestions. ;)
>
> will run another round
2008 Apr 22
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: PowerPC tail call optimization patch
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
> More nitpicks:
> ...
> No need for else here. :-)
Done
> SPDiff = (int)CallerMinReservedArea - (int)ParamSize;
>
> Just change last statement to
> int SPDiff = (int)...
Done
>
> +bool
> +PPCTargetLowering::IsEligibleForTailCallOptimization(SDOperand Call,
> +
2007 Jan 17
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM ARM backend enhancements
I'm happy to announce that Apple is contributing some major
extensions to the LLVM ARM backend. The improvements include support
for ARM v4/v6, vfp support, soft float, pre/postinc support, load/
store multiple generation, constant pool entry motion (to support
large functions), and support for the darwin/arm ABI. In addition to
ARM support, the backend now includes code generation
2009 Dec 16
4
[LLVMdev] Help adding the Bullet physics sdk benchmark to the LLVM test suite?
The linux builds are not using SSE right now, but the vector data is
16-byte aligned on all platforms.
So if you port this SSE code to another platform (Linux, Altivec,
NEON), you could contribute it back to Bullet?
The most interesting SSE part is the innerloop of the constraint
solver: http://tinyurl.com/ydoapct
Some developers replaced some linear algebra functions (in
Bullet/LinearMath) with
2009 Feb 25
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm test suite does not
contain enough vector code to fully test this. Can you revert the
patch first?
Evan
On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Scott Michel wrote:
> Evan:
>
> I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest
> BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members
> and passes results back via
2009 Feb 25
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Evan:
I work on reverting it, although, when I tried yesterday, it wasn't
particularly clean (lots of rejected patches, presumably due to intervening
commits.)
Are you still getting the backtrace or is this just a case of incorrectly
generated code?
-scooter
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com> wrote:
> Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm
2009 Jun 24
3
[LLVMdev] killing vicmp and vfcmp
On Jun 24, 2009, at 12:47 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
>> Now that icmp and fcmp have supported returning vectors of i1 for a
>> while,
>
> the code generators don't know how to codegen vectors of i1, so does
> this actually work?
No, but there are no clients of them yet.
-Chris