similar to: [LLVMdev] [RC3] Visual Studio [8, 9, 10] Release build

Good evening, guys! At first, I apologize my report is a little gross, I have so little time to do checking process minutely. * RC1 RC1 can be built on VS8, 9, 10 with Debug|Release. At one point, r127264(in release_29/trunk) is needed to build with Debug on VS10. RC1 can pass clang-test with any configurations. RC1 fails llvm's check on many tests. * RC1 and patches ToT would be ready

They are good. I am checking with Release now. 20> Clang :: CodeGenObjC/image-info.m I will investigate it later. ...Takumi vs8 20>Failing Tests (3): 20> Clang :: CodeGenObjC/image-info.m 20> LLVM :: Transforms/SRETPromotion/basictest.ll 20> LLVM-Unit :: support/debug/SupportTests.exe/CastingTest.cast 20> Expected Passes : 8106 20> Expected Failures : 73

I downloaded current version of FLAC sources and compiled it with: * GCC 4.8.1 (MSYS from http://xhmikosr.1f0.de/tools/) * Intel C++ Composer XE 2013 update 5 * MSVS 2010 SP1 * MSVS 2012 update 3 (SSSE3 and SSE4.1 code was disabled for all compilers) Stereo 24-bit WAV file was encoded with -8 preset. Encoding time, in seconds: GCC 32-bit: 209 ICC 32-bit: 130 VS10 32-bit: 116 VS12 32-bit: 114

FYI, I have confirmed it works on VS10SP1 with x64|Release. E:\llvm\build\cmake-x64-vs10>bin\Release\Fibonacci.exe 24 verifying... OK We just constructed this LLVM module: --------- ; ModuleID = 'test' (snip) --------- starting fibonacci(24) with JIT... Result: 46368 ...Takumi 2011/8/11 <gleizesd at gmail.com>: > Hello everybody, > > I have sucessfully compiled LLVM

Hello, I've been building Clang under Windows 7 and Visual Studio 2008 for a while now, but had not touched it in a few months. Last night I wiped my build tree to do a full rebuild with the latest version, and got the identical error as David Shipman was seeing last September. Are others able to build under VS9 right now? Thanks, John > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] MS VS2008 build fails -

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Bigcheese <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Nathan Jeffords > <blunted2night at gmail.com> wrote: >> This is cool, I was looking into something like this, but hit a little bit >> of a wall, and then got sidetracked on another project. I was going to use >> llc to generate COFF object files

On 3/14/19 2:04 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:37 PM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com > <mailto:fedor.sergeev at azul.com>> wrote: > >> >> - Add a new proxy ModuleAnalysisManagerLoopProxy for a loop pass >> to be able to get to the ModuleAnalysisManager in one step and >> PSI through it. >

Hi all, To implement more profile-guided optimizations, we’d like to use ProfileSummaryInfo (PSI) and BlockFrequencyInfo (BFI) from more passes of various types, under the new pass manager. The following is what we came up with. Would appreciate feedback. Thanks. Issue It’s not obvious (to me) how to best do this, given that we cannot request an outer-scope analysis result from an inner-scope

Overall seems fine to me. On 3/11/19 8:12 PM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > Here's a revised approach based on the discussion: > > - Cache PSI right after the profile summary in the IR is written in > the pass pipeline. This would avoid the need to insert > RequireAnalysisPass for PSI before each non-module pass that needs it. > PSI can be technically invalidated but unlikely

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:58 AM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com> wrote: > > > On 3/2/19 2:38 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > > Here's a sketch of the proposed approach for just one pass (but imagine > more) > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D58845 > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>

On 3/4/19 10:49 PM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 10:55 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com > <mailto:yamauchi at google.com>> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:58 AM Fedor Sergeev > <fedor.sergeev at azul.com <mailto:fedor.sergeev at azul.com>> wrote: > > > > On 3/2/19 2:38 AM,

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Given I didn't get any response to my original query, I chose not to invest > time in this at the time. I am unlikely to get time for this in the near > future. > > On 12/07/2015 03:13 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote: > > (Resending after removing llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu and using >

Here's a sketch of the proposed approach for just one pass (but imagine more) https://reviews.llvm.org/D58845 On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2/28/19 12:47 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hi all, > > To implement more profile-guided optimizations, we’d like to use > ProfileSummaryInfo

> On 2015-Jun-04, at 12:45, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> On 2015-Jun-04, at 12:28, Ivan Baev <ibaev at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, we got the following assert: >> >> assert(!Working[0].isLoopHeader() && "entry block is a loop header"); >> >> [in

(Resending after removing llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu and using llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org) On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Easwaran Raman <eraman at google.com> wrote: > Hi Philip, > > Is there any update on this? I've been sending patches to get rid of the > callee hotness based inline hints from the frontend and move the logic to > the inliner. The next step is to use

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > On 12/10/2015 04:29 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Philip Reames >> <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: >>> >>> Given I didn't get any response to my original query, I chose not to >>> invest

Hey, I am trying to use the BlockFrequencyInfoWrapperPass to obtain hotness information in my LLVM pass. Attached is a minimal example of code which creates a SIGSEGV. The pass calls AU.addRequired<BlockFrequencyInfoWrapperPass>(); in getAnalysisUsage(..). The problem exists with changed and unchanged IR. The binary is instrumented like this: clang input.bc -fprofile-generate -o

Hello everyone At EuroLLVM I presented some testing work we have been doing on improving correctness of the MC Layer for ARM. There seemed to be interest from the community in seeing the results of this test suite. Background ----------- We are using a test suite, called MC Hammer, that compares MC with an ARM in-house implementation of the same functionality. The test space for this suite is

Hello Alastair, Yeah like I said, I was not aware of the new profile framework being developed. Interestingly BPI and BFI didnt turn up in any searches either. Anyway, I will take a look at them and see how they differ from the existing tools. Profile.pl is understandably a very simple script, but it does make it easier to see some preliminary profile results and identity the hot portions of a

Hi Alok, On 16/07/12 12:41, #ALOK PRAKASH# wrote: > I have been using the Profile.pl and the related passes and > optimizations for about 4 years now. With every new release lately, the > support for the profile scripts and their framework seemed to be > downgrading. Hence, I used my own tiny one line fixes to keep them > working. I offered to send these small patches to keep these