similar to: [LLVMdev] Branch prediction information?

Hi Mahadevan, This looks very nice. Is there a good reason to maintain this outside of the LLVM source tree, or is this something you would like to see come in tree? - Daniel On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Thought you might be interested: > > llvm-py 0.6 was released a couple of days back. This release is

Hi all, Thought you might be interested: llvm-py 0.6 was released a couple of days back. This release is compatible with LLVM 2.7. Check it out at http://www.mdevan.org/llvm-py/. llvm-py has it's own mailing list, at http://groups.google.com/group/llvm-py. Regards, -Mahadevan. (author of llvm-py)

On Mar 29, 2008, at 6:02 AM, Török Edwin wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a > small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. > LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when SelectInst is used. The > idea > is to transform regular branches into selects, when that is possible > and > profitable. LLVM

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > 1) > Are the C bindings complete? That is, is there some part of the C++ API > that is not exposed by the C API? Nope, there's still a lot that's not done. Patches are always welcome :) We've got enough in subversion to implement the Kaleidoscope tutorial though. > 2) > Do

On Mar 31, 2008, at 7:01 AM, Török Edwin wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> On Mar 29, 2008, at 6:02 AM, Török Edwin wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a >>> small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. >>> LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when

Hi, I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when SelectInst is used. The idea is to transform regular branches into selects, when that is possible and profitable. However this needs branch prediction info, and it seems LLVM doesn't provide that AFAICT. Could

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > int sum(int n) > { > return n + sum(n-1); > } > > it generates this: > > define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { > entry: > %tmp2 = add i32 %n, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1] > %tmp3 = tail call i32 @sum( i32 %tmp2 ) nounwind ; <i32>

Hi, While playing around on the LLVM, I tried this code: int sum(int n) { if (n == 0) return 0; else return n + sum(n-1); } and this is what "llvm-gcc -O2" gave me: define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { entry: %tmp215 = icmp eq i32 %n, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1] br i1 %tmp215, label %bb10, label %tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge: ; preds =

Evan Cheng wrote: > On Mar 29, 2008, at 6:02 AM, Török Edwin wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a >> small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. >> LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when SelectInst is used. The >> idea >> is to transform regular branches into

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Mahadevan R wrote: >> While going through the list of intrinsics in Intrinsics.td, I found >> that it does not match the list given in Language Reference [1]. Does >> this mean that they are not to be used / don't work? Or is it just >> that the documentation is

> Note that C bindings have been introduced since 2005, so there may be > a different route available than was taken then. Look in include/llvm- > c. The intent of the C bindings is to enable high-level language > bindings. The current focus is on enabling front-end compilers. Ocaml > and Haskell bindings have been developed atop them, the former being > in the LLVM source

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: >> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Mahadevan R wrote: >>> While going through the list of intrinsics in Intrinsics.td, I found >>> that it does not match the list given in Language Reference [1]. Does >>>

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> > If this is an arbitrary struct, it can be quite tricky. Do you have >> > to worry about bitfields and variable sized fields (for example a >> > variable length array at the end)? What about unions? >> >> There are no bitfields, but it does have a variable length array at

> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:42:49 -0800 > From: Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [ANN] llvm-py 0.5 released. > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Message-ID: <B7A557A7-587A-478A-AB94-B03FDA6254A8 at apple.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > On Nov 22,

> From: OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> > There could just as easily be language bindings between C++ and > Python, he chose the C bindings probably just because they were > easier, but they are most certainly not required. I know that is the > case in a few other scripting languages as well. He ( I :-) ) chose llvm-c based on the thread starting here:

Hi. Version 0.5 of llvm-py, Python bindings for LLVM, has been released. This version supports (only) LLVM 2.4. New instructions of LLVM 2.4 (vicmp, vfcmp, insertvalue, extractvalue) are available. Home page: http://mdevan.nfshost.com/llvm-py/ Feedback welcome. Thanks & Regards, -Mahadevan.

( I don't know if it's allowed to ask such question, if not, please remind me. ) I know Intel implemented several static branch prediction mechanisms these years: * 80486 age: Always-not-take * Pentium4 age: Backwards Taken/Forwards Not-Taken * PM, Core2: Didn't use static prediction, randomly depending on what happens to be in corresponding BTB entry , according to agner's

"Mahadevan R" <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> writes: >> You could use llvm-gcc to convert the struct to an LLVM type. >> Otherwise, it wouldn't be too hard to convert the struct by >> hand as long as it doesn't have any exotic types in it. A >> VLA at the end (with element type T) is currently represented >> by placing a field of type T at the

Hi, The LLVM Assembly Language Reference [1] incorrectly states that the prefix used for dll{import,export} is _imp__; it is actually __imp_. The attached patch fixes this. Thanks & Regards, -Mahadevan. [1] file:///home/mdevan/llvm/docs/LangRef.html#linkage -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: doc-dllimport-prefix.patch Type: text/x-diff Size:

Hi, I need to compute a prediction R-squared for a linear regression. I have figured out how to compute Allen's PRESS statistic (using the PRESS function in the MPV library), but also want to compute the R-squared that goes along with this statistic. I have read that this is computed like an adjusted R-squared, but using the same regressions that are used to compute the PRESS statistic. I