similar to: [LLVMdev] Error Linking Math Library

I am looking for advice on a problem observed with -fprofile-sample-use for samples built with the AutoFDO tool I took the "hmmer" benchmark out of SPEC2006 It is initially compiled clnag++ -o hmmer -O3 -std=gnu89 -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -fno-strict-aliasing -w -g *.c This baseline binary runs in about 164.2 seconds as reported by "perf stat" We build a sample file from this

On 2/7/2017 20:02, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > ... > > My understanding is that BNDCU is the cheapest possible instruction, > just like XOR or ADD, > so the overhead should be relatively small. > Still my guesstimate would be >= 5% since stores are very numerous. > And such overhead will be on top of whatever overhead SafeStack has. > Do you have any measurements to

Hi, I am getting this when running make-test :- $ /usr/src/llvm-test-2.5/configure checking for spec95 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/ben chmarks/spec95/benchspec checking for spec2000 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/b enchmarks/speccpu2000/benchspec checking for spec2006 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/b

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> wrote: > These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the > legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have them from > another source, you need to configure --with-externals=<path> Okay, thanks. Thre should be better warning/error reporting though. Aaron > >

These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have them from another source, you need to configure --with-externals=<path> On Feb 23, 2009, at 10:02 AMPST, Aaron Gray wrote: > Hi, > > I am getting this when running make-test :- > > $ /usr/src/llvm-test-2.5/configure > checking for

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Aaron Gray <aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com > wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> wrote: > >> These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the >> legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have them from >> another source, you need to configure

I am trying to work through the usage of thinlto for distributed builds. Here is the simple thinlto usage, just add -flto=thin everywhere, easy: clang++ -flto=thin -O3 -c -o CreateWay_.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -DSPEC_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN -Wno-dangling-else CreateWay_.cpp clang++ -flto=thin -O3 -c -o Places_.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -DSPEC_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN

Thanks Teresa Yes it is astar, happen to send a tar of the sources but they are just copies from the spec distribution The ld command is: GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.29.1 Thanks for the guidance on path names. The prefix-replace just effects the string written to the object files right? So we could post-process that file with other tools as well, correct? Thanks again --david From: Teresa Johnson

Fails with gold too: Library-native.o:Library.cpp:regway: error: undefined reference to 'vtable for regwayobj' /home/dcallahan/fbsource/fbcode/third-party-buck/platform007/tools/binutils/bin/gold/ld: the vtable symbol may be undefined because the class is missing its key function clang-8: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) From: Teresa Johnson

Hi, We'd like to propose new Loop Distribution pass. The main motivation is to allow partial vectorization of loops. One such example is the main loop of 456.hmmer in SpecINT_2006. The current version of the patch improves hmmer by 24% on ARM64 and 18% on X86. The goal of the pass is to distribute a loop that can't be vectorized because of memory dependence cycles. The pass splits

Thanks Jonas, I wasn't aware of the gold linker plugin. Here's what I do, in my current workflow. First, I use clang to compile each .c file (e.g. for the bzip2 benchmark, or any other) into a .bc file: specmake clean 2> make.clean.err | tee make.clean.out rm -rf bzip2 bzip2.exe *.o *.fppized.f* find . \( -name \*.o -o -name '*.fppized.f*' \) -print | xargs rm -rf

Hi David, > Are the data below all collected when only one function is picked for > instrumentation? Yes, here is a list of the benchmarks and selected functions. +-----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | blks | _Z19BlkSchlsEqEuroNoDivfffffif |

On Feb 23, 2009, at 10:30 AMPST, Aaron Gray wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Aaron Gray <aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com > > wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> > wrote: > These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the > legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have

dear LLVMers, I am trying to use some of the LLVM alias analyses, and I would like to check two things with you: is scev-aa being maintained in LLVM 3.7? Second question: I run cfl-aa, and I got a very small number of pointer disambiguation (no alias) with it. My results for SPEC CINT 2006 follow below. Is this low number of no alias responses something to be excepted? Below the results that I

Summary ======= I'm planning on adjusting SimplifyCFG so that it doesn't turn two-entry phi nodes into selects until later in the pass pipeline, to give passes which can understand phis but not selects more opportunity to optimize. The thing I'm trying to do which made me think of doing this is described below, but from the benchmarking I've done it looks like this is overall a

Hi everyone, The code layout that TailMerging (inside BranchFolding) works on is not the final layout optimized based on the branch probability. Generally, after BlockPlacement, many new merging opportunities emerge. I did an experiment of adding additional BranchFolding and BlockPlacement after the existing BlockPlacement (i.e., -block-placement -branch-folder -block-placement) targeting

Hi Snehasish, thanks for writing up the proposal. As it stands today, path profiling still has serious scalability issue that prevents it from being usable by any optimization passes that may benefit from it. On the other hand, sampling based approach can still be promising. For instance, LBR can potentially together with static CFG constructed from the binary can be used to form path(let)

Hi I am pinging to find out if there is any interest to mentor this proposal for GSoC this year? I've submitted a draft via the GSoC website. David, Vedant it would be great if I could get some advice on refining the goals and particulars of the implementation. The version we use internally is not performance oriented and will require refactoring. Here is a link to the draft document [1].

Hi, I'm proposing to make vectorizer-maximize-bandwidth on by default for loop vectorizer because it should generally help performance. I've tested the performance impact on Intel sandybridge machine with speccpu benchmarks: Benchmark Base:Reference (1) ------------------------------------------------------- spec/2006/fp/C++/444.namd 26.84

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:44:45 +0100, Tobias Grosser via llvm-dev wrote: <snip> > * How stable/fast/… is Polly today > * We build all of AOSP with rather restrictive compile-time limits > * Bootstrapping time of clang is regressed by 6% (at most) > * Removal of scalar dependences is today very generic and must be > sped up in the future > * Polly still