similar to: [LLVMdev] acovea for llvm

I think it is still be hosted on some bzr servers. Thanks Xin On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Is acovea still being distributed? The link that I was able to find > (http://www.coyotegulch.com/products/acovea/) is no longer valid. > >  -Hal > > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:06 -0500, Xin Tong wrote: >> Has anyone tried acovea on

Is acovea still being distributed? The link that I was able to find (http://www.coyotegulch.com/products/acovea/) is no longer valid. -Hal On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:06 -0500, Xin Tong wrote: > Has anyone tried acovea on llvm, acovea is a fairly popular software > package that uses GAs(Genetic Algorithms) to tune compiler > command-line settings to optimize the performance for a given

I'm cross-posting the message below (from GCC list) because I believe it would (at some point) be very beneficial to build an evolutionary optimization pass into LLVM. The idea would be to discover the perfect set of optimizations for a given program by trying them all and analyzing the execution times of each. This would be somewhat like profile driven optimization except the profile is

This is a hot topic in the compiler research community, but the focus there is on (a) choosing the right optimization sequences internally and transparently, rather than through combinations of options, (b) performance prediction techniques so you don't actually have to run gazillion different choices, and perhaps can even avoid the problem of choosing representative inputs, as you talked

Dear R Users, I compiled two R-1.9.1 environments on IBM P690 AIX platform, one with optimization level 3(-O3), another with optimization level 2(-O). I would like to do some performance comparison with these two environments. Can anybody give me some advices for how to do the performance test against R? Thanks in advance. Kexiao

Should not the 4.0.0 release be March _2017_ in the "Release Emails" section on http://llvm.org/ ? -Xin

I do not know too much about clang, is opencl publicly supported in clang ? how about cuda ? Thanks Xin

I have a question on the LLVM JIT I did some brief memory reading one day and I found that a call to a non-library function is resolved by the X86CompilationCallback, but the X86CompilationCallback is reached through a trampoline. why can not the generated code jump to the X86CompilationCallback function directly ? 0x2b0a6a4d103b: mov $0x2b0a6a561010,%rax 0x2b0a6a4d1045:

I understand that we need to push the address to a register then branch using the register. But i am asking why there is a trampoline there such that a call to foo is first branched to an snippet and the snippet branches to the X86CompilationCallback. is this snippet necessary ? Thanks Xin On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Reid Kleckner <reid.kleckner at gmail.com>wrote: > The

but does it have default values ? Thanks Xin On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Che-Liang Chiou <clchiou at gmail.com> wrote: > You specify shader model, bit size and etc. arch-specified parameters > though -march, -mattr and -mcpu, but AFAIK, PTX backend does not use > the GPU thread/block/grid size information in optimization yet. > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Xin

Hello I am trying to enable globalsmodref-aa by default. globalmodref-aa is a ModulePass and therefore can be invalidated and need to be rerun. I see globalsmodref-aa is enabled in LTO passmanager by adding the analysis pass explicitly. I wonder whether globalsmodref-aa can be enabled/run based on pass dependencies, i.e. those indicated in getAnalysisUsage(). Thanks, Xin -------------- next

The address of the callee may be more than 2 GB away in memory, which cannot be encoded as an immediate offset in the call instruction. So, the value is first materialized with a mov instruction which can encode the immediate and then jumped to through a register. Reid On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Xin Tong Utoronto <x.tong at utoronto.ca> wrote: > I have a question on the LLVM JIT

On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 15:11, Vikram Adve wrote: > This is a hot topic in the compiler research community, but the focus > there is on > (a) choosing the right optimization sequences internally and > transparently, rather than through combinations of options, > (b) performance prediction techniques so you don't actually have to run > gazillion different choices, and perhaps

I have a function address held in an uint64_t. I would like to cast the function address to a function prototype and create a call to the function in LLVM. How could I do this ? Thanks Xin

If I turn on one of the llvm interprocedural optimizations without turning on the analysis it uses. will the analysis be turned on automatically ? Thanks Xin

I have a constant parameter in a LLVM function. Is there a way to reserve a CPU register such that it also holds the value of the parameter in LLVM x86 codegen ? Thanks Xin

On 07/15/2015 07:05 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Xin Tong" <trent.xin.tong at gmail.com> >> To: "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> >> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 6:35:11 PM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LICM

Hi Xin, Thank you for your reply! I have tried the 3 alias analyses you have mentioned on LLVM 3.5: 1) $ opt -globalsmodref-aa -aa-eval < xxx.bc > /dev/null (May-alias response 100%) 2) $ opt -tbaa -aa-eval < xxx.bc > /dev/null (May-alias response 100%) 3) $ opt -cfl-aa -aa-eval < xxx.bc> /dev/null (Unknown command line argument '-cfl-aa') It seems that they are not

On 7/19/12 1:23 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote: > Not really, no. If you really, really, wanted to do it, you could: 1) Hack the code generator to not use that register. It might be as simple as modifying the TableGen file to not know that the register exists. 2) Use inline asm to put the constant into that register and fetch it from that register. The real question is: what larger goal are you

I don't think so, but you should check source code. On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Xin Tong <xerox.time.tech at gmail.com> wrote: > but does it have default values ? > > Thanks > > Xin > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Che-Liang Chiou <clchiou at gmail.com> wrote: >> You specify shader model, bit size and etc. arch-specified parameters >>