similar to: [LLVMdev] What benchmarks can LLVM compile and run successfully?

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Li Shengmei <lism03 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > >          I want to know what benchmarks can LLVM compile and run > successfully. > > Such as SPEC CPU2000, SPEC CPU2006 or other benchmarks. llvm-gcc can compile essentially anything in C/C++. -Eli

Hi Ahmed, Yes. I'd share with Kristof and Renato's concerns, and the impact/dependence upon link-time tool should be clarified before disabling this pass. On the other hand, actually the test on our hardware shows disabling this pass without LTO considered, some spec benchmarks would have big regressions, (positive is bad) spec.cpu2000.ref.253_perlbmk 3.27% spec.cpu2000.ref.254_gap

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerolf Hoflehner" <ghoflehner at apple.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVM Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Jiangning Liu" <liujiangning1 at gmail.com>, "George Burgess IV" > <george.burgess.iv at gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014

Hi Scott, On 18 Mar 2007, at 04:22, Scott Fortmann-Roe wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that LLVM had signed up as a mentoring organization for > Google's summer of code. LLVM looks like an exciting project that > overlaps some of my interests. > > I would be interested in developing an additional front end for a > language it does not currently support (I'm open to

Hi, I noticed that LLVM had signed up as a mentoring organization for Google's summer of code. LLVM looks like an exciting project that overlaps some of my interests. I would be interested in developing an additional front end for a language it does not currently support (I'm open to what language). I do not know much about what this entails in regards to what LLVM requires from its

In lto+pgo some (5 out of 12 with usual suspect like perlbench and gcc among them using -flto -Wl,-mllvm,-use-cfl-aa -Wl,-mllvm,-use-cfl-aa-in-codegen) the CINT2006 benchmarks don’t compile. Has the implementation been tested with lto? If not, please stress the implementation more. Do we know reasons for gains? Where did you expect the biggest gains? Some of the losses will likely boil down to

On CINT2006 ARM64/ref input/lto+pgo I practically measure no performance difference for the 7 benchmarks that compile. This includes bzip2 (although different source base than in CINT2000), mcf, hmmer, sjeng, h364ref, astar, xalancbmk On Sep 15, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gerolf Hoflehner"

Hi, all We want to learn the IR of LLVM. Are there any information or documents you can suggest? Or any suggestions are welcome. Thanks Shengmei -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20091211/0a788413/attachment.html>

On 26 February 2015 at 00:57, Ahmed Bougacha <ahmed.bougacha at gmail.com> wrote: > -- A way forward > One obvious way to improve it is: look at uses of globals, and try to > form sets of globals commonly used together. The tricky part is to > define heuristics for "commonly". Also, the pass then becomes much > more expensive. I'm currently looking into

On 19 Mar 2007, at 13:33, Kenneth Hoste wrote: > I think getting a Fortran frontend working will highly benefit the > relevance of LLVM for researchers. Quite a few of the SPEC CPU2000 > and CPU2006 benchmarks are fully or partially written in Fortran, and > the SPEC benchmarks remain by far the most important benchmarks used > in computer architecture and compiler-related

Hi Renato, Please see my answers below. Thanks -Ghassan ________________________________ From: Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> To: Ghassan Shobaki <ghassan_shobaki at yahoo.com> Cc: Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com>; "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:30 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Experimental

Hi folks, I have been stumped on a compilation problem when I tried to build 176.gcc of SPEC CPU2000 with clang v 2.8 (trunk 427) on Linux and intel. First, I tried to compile with 'clang -std=c89 *.c -o gcc.clang' since the default C standard of Clang is c99 while that of gcc is c89. It reported this error: ./c-gperf.h:14:1: error: unknown type name 'inline' inline ^

Hi, all I use llvm-gcc -O4 to compile SPEC 2000, some benchmarks can't be built successfully, such as 164.gzip, 175.vpr etc. The error messages are as follows. .. zh.o unlzw.o unpack.o unzip.o util.o zip.o -o gzip bits.o: file not recognized: File format not recognized collect2: ld returned 1 exit status specmake: *** [gzip] Error 1 specmake options 2> options.err |

On 2009-12-23 08:22, Li Shengmei wrote: > > Hi, all > > I use llvm-gcc –O4 to compile SPEC 2000, some benchmarks > can’t be built successfully, such as 164.gzip, 175.vpr etc. > > The error messages are as follows. > > > > …… > > zh.o unlzw.o unpack.o unzip.o util.o zip.o -o gzip > > bits.o: file not recognized: File format not recognized

On 19 September 2013 17:25, Ghassan Shobaki <ghassan_shobaki at yahoo.com>wrote: > Ghassan: You have made me so curious to try other benchmarks in our future > work. Most academic publications on CPU performance though use SPEC. You > can even find some recent publications that are still using SPEC CPU2000! > When I was at AMD in 2009, performance optimization and benchmarking

On 01/18/2011 06:38 PM, Bin Zeng wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have been stumped on a compilation problem when I tried to build > 176.gcc of SPEC CPU2000 with clang v 2.8 (trunk 427) on Linux and intel. > First, I tried to compile with 'clang -std=c89 *.c -o gcc.clang' since > the default C standard of Clang is c99 while that of gcc is c89. It > reported this error: >

Hi folks, Moving the discussion to llvm.dev. None of the changes we talked earlier help. Find attached the C source code that you can use to reproduce the issue. clang --target=aarch64-linux-gnu -c -mcpu=cortex-a57 -Ofast -fno-math-errno test.c -S -o test.s -mllvm -debug-only=licm LICM hoisting to while.body.lr.ph: %21 = load double** %arrayidx8, align 8, !tbaa !5 LICM hoisting to

Hello LLVM-people, I've been trying (on and off) to compile the _full_ SPEC CPU2000 benchmark suite to LLVM bytecode. The biggest problem I'm facing is the Fortran benchmarks, for which some partial support is already available it seems (using f2c). Unfortunately the f2c compiler only allows the translation of Fortran-77 programs to C code (which is then compiled using llvm-gcc).

Hi, all I come across the problem when building llvm. The errors are as follows ... etJITInfo&, llvm::JITMemoryManager*, llvm::CodeGenOpt::Level, bool)': : undefined reference to `__register_frame' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: *** [/home/lishengmei/llvm-2.6/Release/bin/lli] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/lishengmei/llvm-2.6/tools/lli'

Hi, I am new to Clang. There is a warning when I use clang $llvmc -clang test.c "./bin/ld: warning: cannot find entry symbol mit-llvm-bc; defaulting to 00000000004003c0 llc: bitcode didn't read correctly." When I use lli to execute the test.bc as $lli test. bc The error message is "lli: error loading program 'test.bc': Bitcode stream should be a