similar to: [LLVMdev] Why clang inlines with -O3 flag and opt doesn't?

> llvm_function_new/llvm_value_set_name/llvm_executionengine_run_function, > etc. > > If kept simple, standardized, and generic, I think it would be very useful > to people (even if incomplete). This would allow others to build on it, > and we could 'ship' it as a standard llvm library. It looks like my interface will look vaguely like this. Functions like

On Thu, 12 May 2005, Alexander Friedman wrote: >> llvm_function_new/llvm_value_set_name/llvm_executionengine_run_function, >> etc. >> >> If kept simple, standardized, and generic, I think it would be very useful >> to people (even if incomplete). This would allow others to build on it, >> and we could 'ship' it as a standard llvm library. > > It

I run the same simple Fibonacci computing code in JIT and as a native executable. I see that with argument 45 JIT runs for 11.3sec and executable runs for 7.5sec. Why there is such difference? Yuri -------- fib.ll -------- ; ModuleID = 'all.bc' @.str = private constant [12 x i8] c"fib(%i)=%i\0A\00", align 1 ; <[12 x i8]*> [#uses=1] define i32 @fib(i32 %AnArg) {

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote: > When I compile my C fibonacci example fib.c with 'clang -O3 -c -emit-llvm -o fib-clang.bc fib.c&&  llvm-dis fib-clang.bc' I get fib-clang.ll that has some degree of inlining in it. > > But when I get an equivalent to fib.c file fib.ll and run it through opt with the command 'llvm-as

Hi Yuri, > But when I get an equivalent to fib.c file fib.ll and run it through opt with the command 'llvm-as fib.ll&& opt -O3 fib.bc -o fib-opt.bc&& llvm-dis fib-opt.bc' resulting fib-opt.ll doesn't have any degree of inlining despite the flag -O3. perhaps because your hand written .ll has no target information in it. I'm not sure why that would effect

Valery, That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Reid. Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 >

On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? Reid. Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > >>That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can > only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to > move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? You're right. The simples way to do this would be to have: projects/ SmallExamples/

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs > repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Here's an idea: how about we take the ModuleMaker, Valery's previous example, and this one and put them all in one "small examples" project? -Chris > Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > >

Here's my translation of the Fibonacci example into OCaml: open Printf open Llvm let build_fib m = let fibf = define_function "fib" (function_type i32_type [| i32_type |]) m in let bb = builder_at_end (entry_block fibf) in let one = const_int i32_type 1 and two = const_int i32_type 2 in let argx = param fibf 0 in set_value_name "AnArg" argx; let

I am running this code in JIT on x86 (32 bit). It crashes when 'alloca %object' instruction is within the body of the cycle, and it finishes successfully when this instruction is in the beginning of main (outside the cycle). Crash occurs in the middle of the cycle after few hundreds of thousands iterations. What is wrong? Does alloca inside the cycle forces it to allocate it on stack

Solved it. Looking at the source of bison, I found an undocumented environment variable M4 that points to the m4 binary. Setting it to the absolute path did the job. When not present, it ought to find it in the path as it uses execvp. At least on Unix. I have no idea what it does on Windows as I could not get the source used to build the Windows version (the installer claimed it installed the

I have realised that I should have used "detach" before attaching another dataframe, but even when I do this it's still giving me lots of lines, rather than just one: My code: m<-runif(1,0,1) m mres<-m*(seq(1,12)) mres ssd<-rexp(1,1) ssd devs<-rep(0,length(mres)) for(i in 1:length(mres)){devs[i]<-rnorm(1,0,ssd)} devs plot(-10,-10,xlim=c(1,24),ylim=c(0,20000))

Hello, I am synthesising some sales data over a twelve month period, and then trying to use the "predict" function, firstly to generate a thirteenth month forecast with upper and lower 95% confidence limits. So far so good But what I then want to do is add the upper sales value at the 95th confidence limit to the vector of thirteen months and their respective sales to create a

Hello. Sorry I am not sure this question should go to llvm or mesa3d-dev mailing list, so I post it to both. I am writing a llvm backend for a modern graphics processor which has a ISA very similar to that of Direct 3D. I am reading the code in Gallium-3D driver in a mesa3d branch, which converts the shader programs (TGSI tokens) to LLVM IR. For the shader instruction also found in LLVM IR,

On Thu, 5 May 2005, Alexander Friedman wrote: >>> Does there happen to be a C interface to the jit ? Our scheme impl >>> has a good FFI, but it doesn't do C++. If not, this is no big deal, >>> and i'll just write something myself. >> >> No, but such bindings would be *very useful*. And since there might be >> other people who need them this

Hi, I have configured two machines for testing gfs filesystems. They are attached to a iscsi device and centos versions are: CentOS release 5.4 (Final) Linux node1.fib.upc.es 2.6.18-164.el5 #1 SMP Thu Sep 3 03:33:56 EDT 2009 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux The problem is if I try to mount a gfs partition it hangs. [root at node2 ~]# cman_tool status Version: 6.2.0 Config Version: 29 Cluster Name:

> So as it stands, one should think of out JIT as something akin to the > early Java JITs: one function at a time and only one compile per > function. This is extremely primative by modern JIT standards, where a > JIT will do profiling, find hot functions and reoptimize them, > reoptimize functions when more information about the call tree is > available, have several levels of

Hello everybody, On the documentation page for the tailcallelim pass you can read: "This pass transforms functions that are prevented from being tail recursive by an associative expression to use an accumulator variable, thus compiling the typical naive factorial or fib implementation into efficient code” However, I don’t see this behavior when trying to compile this variant of the

I am trying to locate instructions in an LLVM Pass by line and column number (reported by an third-party tool) to instrument them. To achieve this, I am compiling my source files with `clang -g -O0 -emit-llvm` and looking for the information in the metadata using this code: const DebugLoc &location = instruction->getDebugLoc(); // location.getLine() // location.getCol()