similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM and Spec2006

Hi Reza, -O4 is the highest level of LLVM optimization that I know of. But, I don't know if it has been tried on Spec2006. IIRC, Dan Gohman has run Spec. tests with LLVM, so he can provide more info. - fariborz On Jul 19, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Reza Yazdani wrote: > Hi, > > What are the best options to compile Spec2006 with LLVM compilers to > get the best performance numbers

Hi, I ran Spec2006 with -O4. All integer benchmarks passed, but only 8 out 17 of floating point benchmarks passed. Is this normal or I made a mistake in my build? Reza -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100722/4c4a81a9/attachment.html>

On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:18 PMPDT, Reza Yazdani wrote: > Hi, > > I ran Spec2006 with -O4. All integer benchmarks passed, but only 8 > out 17 of floating point benchmarks passed. Is this normal or I > made a mistake in my build? Hi Reza. Somebody on Linux should answer, but I don't think it's normal. You may have checked out the source at a moment when it had a bug

Following is the list of fp benchmarks that fail. They all pass with -O3, but some fail with -O4. I did the test run. Thanks, Reza Estimated Estimated Base Base Base Peak Peak Peak Benchmarks Ref. Run Time Ratio Ref. Run Time Ratio -------------- ------ --------- ---------

Hello, I down loaded "llvm-gcc4.2-2.7-x86_64-linux" and I built Spec2006 with it. It is great and except for one benchmark the rest work fine. I want to build them with LTO now. I followed the directions in " http://llvm.org/docs/GoldPlugin.html" and built ar, nm-new, and ld-new in binutils. I also built libLLVMgold.so. I get the following error: llvm-gcc: -use-gold-plugin,

On 07/20/10 18:03, Jim Grosbach wrote: > -O4 does give good additional performance compared to -O3 with llvm. The additional inlining opportunities and such add up quite a bit. The SPEC2006 runs I've done have all been within the framework of the llvm test suite, the LTO is run directly, rather than via an explicit -O4 option. The test-suite Makefiles themselves are probably the best place

On 21 July 2010 22:14, Reza Yazdani <ry.yazdani at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I down loaded "llvm-gcc4.2-2.7-x86_64-linux" and I built Spec2006 with it. > It is great and except for one benchmark the rest work fine. I want to build > them with LTO now. I followed the directions in > "http://llvm.org/docs/GoldPlugin.html" and built ar, nm-new, and

433.milc, 447.deall, and 450.soplex are run as part of the nightly tests on Darwin (=MacOSX) in a way that closely approximates -O4. They are working there. I am inclined to suspect gold given that they work at -O3. Can a Linux person comment? On Jul 23, 2010, at 10:19 AMPDT, Reza Yazdani wrote: > Following is the list of fp benchmarks that fail. They all pass with > -O3, but

Thank you, Adam. It passes all the benchmarks I have. Haicheng From: anemet at apple.com [mailto:anemet at apple.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 7:17 PM To: Haicheng Wu; Eric Christopher; Benjamin Kramer Cc: llvm-dev Subject: Re: Regression in SPEC2006/gcc caused by LoopLoadElimination I’ve committed the fix in r263058. Haicheng, Eric/Benjamin, can you guys please give it a

On 08/16/2013 01:42 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 16 August 2013 20:02, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com > <mailto:rkotler at mips.com>> wrote: > > -std=gnu89 is not valid for c++ > > > I think the point here is that this is the default std for GCC but not > Clang, so you have to force clang to behave like GCC. For C++, you'll > have to force

Hi Adam, I find LoopLoadElimination (r262250) causes SPEC2006/gcc generate wrong result (166.s) in AArch64 when running with *ref* data set. The error happens when I use either "-Ofast -flto -fuse-ld=gold" or "-O3 -fno-strict-aliasing". Please let me know if you need more information. Best, Haicheng -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Actually I am trying to run SPEC2006 through the Makefiles provided with LLVM Test Suite, so I think it should work properly... On 18 February 2013 15:49, Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux.vnet.ibm.com>wrote: > I can't really tell what is happening based on this output, but 'make' is > not the right way > to build SPECcpu2006 components. You need to do either by

> On Mar 7, 2016, at 9:43 AM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Haicheng, > > Sorry about the breakage. I reverted it in r262839. > > I will try to reproduce it locally. Please don’t blow away your directories yet in case I need further help. OK, I managed to reproduce this locally. Should be able to make progress from here without further help from

I can't really tell what is happening based on this output, but 'make' is not the right way to build SPECcpu2006 components. You need to do either by using the supplied 'runspec' command with '-build' action directive or to issue the 'specmake' (which is a make adjusted by spec.org) on the build component folder. I can build 433.milc on PPC64 with clang without

Dear LLVMers, I am having trouble to run SPEC2006. I have checked in my log file that the spec root has been correctly found with ./configure, but when I try: make TEST=simple in the External folder I get the following error: make -C /home/izabela/svn_llvm/llvm/projects/test-suite/tools all \ ORIGINAL_CC="clang" \ ORIGINAL_CXX="clang" make[1]: Entering directory

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote: > I’ve committed the fix in r263058. Haicheng, Eric/Benjamin, can you guys > please give it a test with your codebase. (You need to enable the pass with > -mllvm -enable-loop-load-elim.) The miscompilation I was seeing is gone now, too. Thanks! > On Mar 7, 2016, at 11:05 PM, Adam Nemet <anemet at

I used the suite with clang 3.3 a few months ago. If I remember correctly, I ran into the same error seen here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-November/036013.html Although it doesn't seem to be a problem with the frontend, adding -std=gnu89, as suggested, fixed everything for me. H. ----- Original Message ----- From: reed kotler Sent: 08/16/13 01:26 AM To: LLVM Developers

On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:46 AM, John McCall wrote: >> On Sep 13, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> I compiled with "llvm-gcc -emit-llvm test.c -S -o test.ll". Attached to this >>>> message are the source and the resulting ll output. >>> >>> compile with optimization. The

On May 6, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On May 6, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > >> This seems wrong -- if a test fails, it shouldn't stop the whole >> "make", it should just get logged as a failure and continue. > > That's a frustrating aspect of the test-suite Makefiles. I don't know how to work around it without removing the test

On Jul 22, 2010, at 2:53 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote: > >> >> Building llvm is failing for me today. I am using clang++ to build >> (which has not changed). >> >> llvm[2]: Compiling EDMain.cpp for Debug+Asserts build (PIC) >> EDMain.cpp:267:39: error: C-style cast from