similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM vs Java bytecode vs C for (IR)

Soumya, its [root at mseas-data2 ~]# glusterfs --version glusterfs 3.7.11 built on Apr 27 2016 14:09:20 Repository revision: git://git.gluster.com/glusterfs.git Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Red Hat, Inc. <http://www.redhat.com/> GlusterFS comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. It is licensed to you under your choice of the GNU Lesser General Public License, version 3 or any later version (LGPLv3

On 4/14/13 3:35 PM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > In the past, I've just referenced Chris's CGO 2004 paper when > referring to LLVM: I second that. We at Illinois typically cite Chris's CGO paper. The bibtex is: @InProceedings{LLVM:CGO04, Author = {Chris Lattner and Vikram Adve}, Title = {{LLVM}: A Compilation Framework for Lifelong Program Analysis and

Hi. "New" user looking for best places to dig. Question : Where should I look for the current state(s) of the art for translating Java bytecode into LLVM IR? My objective is to end up with a retargetable toolchain like this: **.java ==(javac)==> { *.class } ==(Java bytecode frontend)==> *.bc ==(backend)==> target language* My targets are various, and I expect to have to

I just had a chance to read some of follow-up comments on Reid's initial document. I agree with Chris's discussion below of what is needed for users to get IPO/lifelong opt'n via LLVM without extensive changes to Makefiles, and about what .o files should contain. This is in perfect agreement with what I just said about how users should view LLVM. --Vikram

Hi Terry, I'm not part of that project but I'll take a stab at answering your question. Vikram Adve is probably the person to answer. The point of Lifelong Code Optimization is to continuously optimize the code during its lifetime, even while it is running. By profiling the code, it is possible to discover the program's hot spots and intensely optimize those portions of the program.

Hi Chris, > > I use NAG with llvm-gcc4. What sort of errors do you get? Did you > configure llvm-test with the appropriate flags to find it? > Yes, I did. llvm-test is configured as follows: (in /work/LLVM/1.8/ llvm/project/llvm-test): ./configure --with-spec2000=/work/SPEC_CPU2000_1.3_src/benchspec -- without-f2c --with-f95-bin=/work/NAG_f95/bin --with-f95-lib=/work/

On 22/2/2023 2:56 ?.?., Nikolaos Milas wrote: > On 22/2/2023 2:30 ?.?., Aki Tuomi wrote: >> Can you please try >> >> doveadm exec imap -u username_of_the_user >> 1 LIST "" "*" >> >> and see if it is there? > > Here is the output: > > # doveadm exec imap -u userx > * PREAUTH [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SASL-IR LOGIN-REFERRALS ID

Hi, I wanted to use VMKit project to convert Java Bytecode to LLVM IR bitcode. But I do not know how to start, since I came to know that VMkit is written for llvm -3.3 version, but I want it for latest LLVM version 6.0.1. So, could you please suggest me, whether I have to write it whole project from scratch to meet my requirement of latest llvm version, or can use existing project by building

In the past, I've just referenced Chris's CGO 2004 paper when referring to LLVM: C. Lattner and V. Adve. LLVM: A compilation framework for lifelong program analysis & transformation. For sub-projects like Clang and DragonEgg, I just cite the URLs: [4] Clang. clang.llvm.org. [5] DragonEgg. dragonegg.llvm.org. I don't know of any canonical references for these. On Sun, Apr 14,

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: >> It doesn't to me. If you set F95_DIR to /work/NAG_f95 things will >> probably work much better for you. > > No, that doesn't seem to be the problem. If I provide the additional > --with-f95 option with the correct directory to configure, > I still get the same errors (although it mentions /work/NAG_f95/lib/ >

On 11.01.2011, at 12:02, Csaba Raduly wrote: > clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) > Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > Thread model: posix > > Fails to compile ctags 5.8 (also 5.6), specifically eiffel.c: > > $ clang -v -c e.c -O2 -Wno-unused-value > clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) […] > bool<unnamed>::LoopRotate::rotateLoop(llvm::Loop*): Assertion `DidIt >

On 31 Aug 2006, at 07:58, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: >>> $ grep F95 .../projects/llvm-test/Makefile.config >> >> -bash-3.00$ grep F95 projects/llvm-test/Makefile.config >> # F95: Enable LLVM to run Fortran benchmarks without a Fortran >> front-end >> USE_F95=1 >> F95_DIR := >> F95 :=

Hello, We are running Dovecot 2.3.18 (together with Postfix) on CentOS 7. It uses a Maildir structure. We have a user who has organized his mailbox as shows up at the end of this mail. The user had forgotten that he had renamed his "Grants Active \ European" (.Grants Active.European) folder to "Grants Active \ International" (.Grants Active.International), he thought that

Hi Terry, Reid is exactly right about the benefits of static (link-time) optimization for whole programs. When all libraries are available, it could alllow significantly better optimization without run-time overhead. But it is increasingly common today for libraries to be dynamically linked. In these cases, you could get the benefits of LLVM optimization in two ways, *if* you compile the

On 22/2/2023 2:30 ?.?., Aki Tuomi wrote: > Can you please try > > doveadm exec imap -u username_of_the_user > 1 LIST "" "*" > > and see if it is there? Here is the output: # doveadm exec imap -u userx * PREAUTH [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SASL-IR LOGIN-REFERRALS ID ENABLE IDLE SORT SORT=DISPLAY THREAD=REFERENCES THREAD=REFS THREAD=ORDEREDSUBJECT MULTIAPPEND

hello, I have a question about the llvm jit. Does it use the profile information generated during runtime to enhance the generated code for arm processor? according to 'LLVM: A Compilation Framework for Lifelong Program Analysis **<http://llvm.org/pubs/2004-01-30-CGO-LLVM.html>' it is available but can't find it in the current source code. I really appreciate any help. Thanks in

- your *FirstnameLastname* username JohnBoero - the proposed subject of your Wiki contribution(s) To seek the holy grail. But mostly to fix the rampant 404 download links for CentOS Atomic media here: https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic/Download - the proposed location of your Wiki contribution(s) https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic/Download Ex

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: >> I use NAG with llvm-gcc4. What sort of errors do you get? Did you >> configure llvm-test with the appropriate flags to find it? > Yes, I did. llvm-test is configured as follows: (in /work/LLVM/1.8/ > llvm/project/llvm-test): > ./configure --with-spec2000=/work/SPEC_CPU2000_1.3_src/benchspec -- > without-f2c

Hi everybody, Recently, I found the Lifelong Code Optimization project on the website. And I have a question here, would you please explain it for me? In the home page of the project, it is said that the Goal of the project is to enable mordern programs to be optimized at link time with all static binary code. Here I wonder, why the library code must be static, i.e. why a dynamically

clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Thread model: posix Fails to compile ctags 5.8 (also 5.6), specifically eiffel.c: $ clang -v -c e.c -O2 -Wno-unused-value clang version 2.9 (trunk 123166) Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Thread model: posix "/home/csaba/bin/clang" -cc1 -triple x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -emit-obj -disable-free -main-file-name e.c