similar to: [LLVMdev] Dynamic Optimization selection for individual functions

Hi All, I am new to LLVM. One of the things I would like to do is to try and extract source features (e.g. a normalised distribution of the various type of instructions in each function.), can anyone point me to a good way of doing that? If it is not already implemented do you think creating a feature Extraction pass and passing it as an optimisation pass would be the way to go? Cheers, Sameer --

On 19 June 2011 14:44, Suresh Purini <suresh.purini at gmail.com> wrote: >  I am doing few experiments to do understand optimization phase > interactions. Here is a brief description of my experiements. > > 1. I picked the list of machine independent optimizations acting on > llvm IR (those that are enabled at O3). > 2.  for each optimzation in the optimization-list >  

Dear all, I am doing few experiments to do understand optimization phase interactions. Here is a brief description of my experiements. 1. I picked the list of machine independent optimizations acting on llvm IR (those that are enabled at O3). 2. for each optimzation in the optimization-list a) Compiled the program using 'clang -c O0 -flto program.c' b) opt

Hi, I am getting *Can't provide secure audio requested in SDP offer* with sipml5 client hosted on my local system [1060] ; This will be WebRTC client type=friend username=1060 ; The Auth user for SIP.js host=dynamic ; Allows any host to register secret=sameer ; The SIP Password for SIP.js encryption=yes ; Tell Asterisk to use encryption for this peer avpf=yes ; Tell Asterisk to use AVPF

Hey guys Is it possible to record with mixmonitor straight into mp3. I am trying to reduce disk space and want my calls to be recorded in mp3 Instead of wav. Sent from Samsung Mobile <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Sameer Rathod <sameer at hostnsoft.com> </div><div>Date:30/06/2014 9:23 PM (GMT+02:00) </div><div>To:

Hi, I have updated the review here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D21723 As Sameer pointed out, the motivation is: In OpenCL 2.x, two atomic operations on the same atomic object need to have the same scope to prevent a data race. This derives from the definition of "inclusive scope" in OpenCL 2.x. Encoding OpenCL 2.x scope as metadata in LLVM IR would be a problem because there cannot be a

Hi Preston, I was wondering ... "Bottom" is a bit overloaded as far as terms go. Would SCEVNaN be a better name for this beast? Sameer. > -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On > Behalf Of Sameer Sahasrabuddhe > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 9:16 AM > To: preston.briggs at gmail.com > Cc: LLVM

On 1/9/2015 4:14 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Sahasrabuddhe, Sameer > <sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com <mailto:sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com>> > wrote: > > Here's what this looks like to me: > > 1. LLVM text format will use string symbols for memory scopes, > and not numbers. The set of strings is target

> On Aug 17, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Zhuravlyov, Konstantin <Konstantin.Zhuravlyov at amd.com> wrote: > > >Why not going with a metadata attachment directly and kill the "singlethread" keyword? Something like: > >Something like: > > cmpxchg i32* %addr, i32 42, i32 0 monotonic monotonic, 3, !memory.scope{!42} > > cmpxchg i32* %addr, i32 42, i32 0 monotonic

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe < sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com> wrote: > Ping! We need to close on whether everyone is convinced that symbolic > memory scopes have a significant advantage over opaque numbers. Either of > them will be examined by optimizations using a target-implemented API. I > personally don't think that readability in the LLVM

On 11/19/2014 4:05 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Sahasrabuddhe, Sameer > <sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com <mailto:sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com>> > wrote: > > 1. Update the synchronization scope field in atomic instructions > from a > single bit to a wider field, say 32-bit unsigned integer. > > > I

I've not had a good chance to look at the patches in detail, but just to clarify one point: I don't really care whether we number things going up or down from single threaded to "every thread". I just think it makes sense to expose them in the in-memory IR interface as an enum with a particular ordering so that code can use the obvious sorts of tests for comparing two orderings

> On Nov 18, 2014, at 2:35 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Sahasrabuddhe, Sameer <sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com <mailto:sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com>> wrote: > 1. Update the synchronization scope field in atomic instructions from a > single bit to a wider field, say 32-bit unsigned integer.

Hi Sameer, > On Jan 5, 2015, at 4:51 AM, Sahasrabuddhe, Sameer <Sameer.Sahasrabuddhe at amd.com> wrote: > > Right. The second version of my patches fixes the bitcode encoding. But now I see another potential problem with future bitcode if we require an ordering on the scopes. What happens when a backend later introduces a new scope that goes into the middle of the order? If they

Problem with this is client needs to listen to the call recordings and my interface will only display .wav or .mp3 so they will moan if they have to wait until the next day for today's recordings Sent from Samsung Mobile <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: binary <dreamer.binary at gmail.com> </div><div>Date:01/07/2014 6:09 PM

> On Aug 21, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > On 08/17/2016 03:05 PM, Mehdi Amini wrote: >> >>> On Aug 17, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Zhuravlyov, Konstantin <Konstantin.Zhuravlyov at amd.com <mailto:Konstantin.Zhuravlyov at amd.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >Why not going with a metadata attachment directly

Is there a vorbis plug-in for Real Player or the Windows Media Player? Sameer -- Sameer Verma Asst. Professor of Information Systems San Francisco State University San Francisco CA 94132 USA http://verma.sfsu.edu/ --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe <sameer.sahasrabuddhe at amd.com> wrote: > On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 13:04:46 +0530 > Jun Koi <junkoi2004 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> i am wondering if this link is still updated? >> >> http://www.llvm.org/docs/CMake.html#developing-llvm-pass-out-of-source >> >> i follow the instruction from the link,

Hello, What would be the expected behaviour of rsync, synchronizing a file that is changing in size. If I have a file ( say 100G ) that is being gzipped, and I start an rsync of that file system to a remote location, would rsync just send the data of that gzip file that exists on disk at that point in time, or would it keep looping seeing that the file is changing. Thanks, Sameer

On 1/6/2015 1:01 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com > <mailto:resistor at mac.com>> wrote: > > Hi Sameer, > > > On Jan 5, 2015, at 4:51 AM, Sahasrabuddhe, Sameer > <Sameer.Sahasrabuddhe at amd.com > <mailto:Sameer.Sahasrabuddhe at amd.com>> wrote: > >