similar to: [LLVMdev] Hi Cache Miss and Branch Misprediction

Ketan Pundlik Umare wrote: > Hi Guys, > I am an absolute newbie to the compiler community. I am experimenting a little bit with llvm. > I have a few small questions, i would be really great if someone could help me. It sounds like what you want is valgrind --tool=cachegrind (or --tool=callgrind). See http://valgrind.org/ > 1. Can i find out (is there something already built), if the

Than a lot John!!!! That was great, i wanted to read the performance counter, but was always afraid how llvm would react (virtual machine) Thanx for the resource i ll go through it. i think i read somewhere that llvm doesnot support assembly instructions??? Also can you redirect me to run-time transforms for llvm, where can i find the material. I thought that the transfor pass is done on the IR

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Mike Stump <mrs at apple.com> wrote: > /* snip */ AMD's CodeAnalyst is free and quite wonderful at this job. Shows details about just about anything the CPU reports (and on newer AMD CPU's there is an even more ridiculous amount of information) about every little function call, time they took, multiple profiling modes, etc...

Thanx a lot Guys!! But i have to do this online and and use it to do some kind code transformation. Its for a different project. But all this has given me a quite a bit of knowledge.Wow!!! Thank you Best Ketan ----- Original Message ----- From: "OvermindDL1" <overminddl1 at gmail.com> To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Monday,

On Sep 28, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Ketan Pundlik Umare wrote: > I am an absolute newbie to the compiler community. I am > experimenting a little bit with llvm. > I have a few small questions, i would be really great if someone > could help me. > > 1. Can i find out (is there something already built), if the > previous instruction / or some instruction was a cache miss. >

I have a question about the performance of the implementation of the stack protector in LLVM. Consider the following C program: ===== void canary() { char buf[20]; buf[0]++; } int main() { int i; for (i = 0; i < 1000000000; ++i) canary(); return 0; } ===== This should definately run slower when stack protection is enabled, right? I have measured the runtime of

If you compile this with optimizations, then the 'canary()' function should be totally inlined into the 'main()' function. In that case, the cost of the stack protectors will be very small compared to the loop. -bw On Mar 9, 2012, at 2:52 AM, Job Noorman <jobnoorman at gmail.com> wrote: > I have a question about the performance of the implementation of the stack >

Olly Betts <olly at survex.com> wrote: > The report you show seems to be just the time take by each function > directly rather than including functions it calls. It looks like a lot > of the time is spent in cursor movement, as totalling up things that > seem like they'd be due to that I quickly get to 40+% but it's hard > to tell if that's about the actual total

Hey, We hit a bug today because Arel::Visitors::ToSql is not threadsafe. Here is what is happening: Arel::Visitors::ENGINE_VISITORS is a cache of visitors instances. These instances are not inherently threadsafe because it contains state ''@last_column'', ''@connection'' that is shared between threads. The other variables ''@pool'',

Hello everybody, I am looking for a tool (in Linux or Windows) that allow me to get performance measures like cycle execution, cache accesses, etc. for an x86 architecture. I want to estimate the performance overhead due to the modification that I do using LLVM. Any suggestion is welcome. Thanks in advance, -- Juan Carlos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Hi, For the last day or two I having been trying to get Valgrind/Callgrind 3.6.1 to work on Centos Linux 5.5 using a simple Fibonacci C++ program(shown below). After compiling the program using g++ -g -o MatchUpAccurate MatchUpAccurate.cpp, we run: /home/frankc/DQTTest/valgrind-3.6.1/coregrind/valgrind --tool=callgrind --dump-instr=yes --simulate-cache=yes --collect-jumps=yes

Hello guys, I get the following error whenever i try to check if the following pass exists. I am using Mac OSX leopard and gcc4 opt -load ../Release/lib/LLVMHello.dylib -hello Error opening '../Release/lib/LLVMHello.dylib': dlopen(../Release/lib/LLVMHello.dylib, 1): Symbol not found: __ZN4llvm12FunctionPass11runOnModuleERNS_6ModuleE Referenced from:

You mean 'cachegrind'? http://valgrind.org/info/tools.html#cachegrind I don't know any public tool better than this (but someone please tell me if I am misinformed). - Daniel On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Juan Carlos Martinez Santos<juanc.martinez.santos at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I am looking for a tool (in Linux or Windows) that allow me to get

How can I do function profiling and BB profiling with current llvm and llvm-gcc4? runtime/libprofile is disabled when using llvm-gcc4, but... is there any alternative to linking with libprofile_rt.so? How can I use llvm-prof? is utils/profile.pl obsolete? Thanks in advance, josem

Hi, There is reported bug about this (#2771), or at least related. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2771 Though it seems there is no "proper" solution known so far. The workaround is to use 'opt' from the Release/bin directory In your case: ../Release/bin/opt -load ../Release/lib/LLVMHello.dylib -hello Would probably work. Best regards Vlado > Hello guys, > >

I managed to find this in the archives, so far: http://www.nabble.com/Setting-up-CCRB-behind-apache-proxy-tt14016053.html#a14099749 Found a better alternative to doing this in my .htaccess instead of messing with the httpd.conf, in case someone is interested: --- snip --- RewriteEngine On ### for cruisecontrol RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://localhost:3333/$1 [P] AuthType Basic

On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Jose M. Moya wrote: > How can I do function profiling and BB profiling with current llvm and > llvm-gcc4? > > runtime/libprofile is disabled when using llvm-gcc4, but... is there any > alternative to linking with libprofile_rt.so? > > How can I use llvm-prof? is utils/profile.pl obsolete? The profiling support in LLVM hasn't been used for quite a

Dear all, I posted this problem sometime back on 0.9.26 (http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-users/2006-December/024086.html). I thought the problem was fixed, but it seemed not. >From 0.9.26 all the way to the latest 0.9.30, I've been seeing this problem on my system (Linux flying 2.6.17-11-generic #2 SMP Thu Feb 1 19:52:28 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux; Ubuntu Edgy installed, but running

I''m having following issue .. i import the zpool and it shows pool imported correctly but after few seconds when i issue command zpool list .. it does not show any pool and when again i try to import it says device is missing in pool .. what could be the reason for this .. and yes this all started after i upgraded the powerpath abcxxxx # zpool import pool: emcpool1 id:

-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] A simulation tool Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 17:23:34 -0500 Size: 2903 URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090901/c1e167ca/attachment.eml>