similar to: [LLVMdev] Instruction Cleanup Questions

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > I am working on cleaning up some PPC code generation. Two questions: > > 1. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up self-moves: > 0x00000000100057c0 <+208>: mr r3,r3 > > 2. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up unconditional jumps that > should be fall-throughs: >

Hi Hal, On 07/06/2012 09:57, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov > <mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: > > I am working on cleaning up some PPC code generation. Two questions: > > 1. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up self-moves: > 0x00000000100057c0 <+208>: mr r3,r3 > and

On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 10:34:03 +0200 Ivan Llopard <ivanllopard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Hal, > > On 07/06/2012 09:57, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov > > <mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: > > > > I am working on cleaning up some PPC code generation. Two > > questions: >

Usage data(gasoline) Format A data frame with 60 observations on the following 2 variables. octane a numeric vector. The octane number. NIR a matrix with 401 columns. The NIR spectrum and I see the gasoline data to see below NIR.1686 nm NIR.1688 nm NIR.1690 nm NIR.1692 nm NIR.1694 nm NIR.1696 nm NIR.1698 nm NIR.1700 nm 1 1.242645 1.250789 1.246626 1.250985 1.264189 1.244678 1.245913

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> > <dropping llvm-commits> >> > >> > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander

I am working on a back end for an architecture whose jump via table instruction includes the range check. If the index is out of range, the jump table instruction just falls through. I implemented a pass to remove the range check generated before the jump table instruction because it is superfluous. This causes as assertion in MachineBlockPlacement.cpp:

Ping. On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:

Hi, I would like to learn the details regarding what exactly PGO does for basic block layout/code placement optimizations in llvm. Could you please point me to some descriptions? Is it close to this paper (Karl Pettis and Robert C. Hansen. 1990. Profile guided code positioning. PLDI'90) http://perso.ensta-paristech.fr/~bmonsuez/Cours/B6-4/Articles/papers15.pdf? Whether it is purely

On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > A new patch is attached that is *much* less of a rough draft. Sorry for any confusion due to the early state of the patch. Thanks, Chandler. This is great stuff. > Still, I never intended this to be on-by-default at first. This is a starting point, that I hope can be improved into something that is on-by-default eventually, but

I'm trying to port llvm-lua so it's buildable with llvm trunk. A problem I'm running into is that it uses the older BlockPlacement pass. From searching around and reading llvm's commit, this pass has been replaced and superseded by Chandler's MachineBlockPlacement pass. What's unclear to me is how exactly do you add this pass to say a function pass manager? The current

I have a domain with two Samba DC's I don't want to use either of them as a fileserver, so I want to build a separate file server which is not a DC, which will deliver all the files to the lovely little windows users (including their roaming profiles). I've been looking online and there seems to be a thousand different ways to "join" my fileserver to the domain, but most of

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > > <dropping llvm-commits> > > > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > > > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, > >> > >> There was a discussion on

Hi, I'm facing a samba internal dns problem. Every command which starts with "samba-tool dns" throughs the following exception: ERROR(runtime): uncaught exception - (-1073741801, 'Memory allocation error') File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", line 175, in _run return self.run(*args, **kwargs) File

I am having a problem with doing a :through that goes back to the same table. The following are my two classes: >>>>> class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :spanks has_many :spanked, :through => :spanks, :source => :spanked_user has_many :was_spanked_by, :through => :spanks, :source => :user end class Spank < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :spanker,

Hello all! I have a problem to group my data (years) in 10 years classes. For example for year year decade 1598 1590-1600 1599 1590-1600 1600 1590-1600 1601 1600-1610 --- my is like this> [1] 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 [16] 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 [31] 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633

Hi, guys, I compiled a subroutine with -O2, and llvm backend produced codes like: ################################################################## LBB0_32: ... R31 = -1 R20 = R31 * R20; .... bnz R2, LBB0_34 LBB0_31: ... b LBB0_34 LBB0_33: # weird basic block? R20 = R5 LBB0_34: ....

On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > <dropping llvm-commits> > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, >> >> There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. > > I missed the earlier

Ping. On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at

Hi, After building out project in release mode, caught an assertion, which we have not seen before: hello_f: /tmp/rpmbuild_debug/BUILD/llvm/build/include/llvm/ADT/DenseMap.h:126: void llvm::DenseMap<KeyT, ValueT, KeyInfoT>::clear() [with KeyT = llvm::MachineBasicBlock*, ValueT = <unnamed>::BlockChain*, KeyInfoT = llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::MachineBasicBlock*>]: Assertion

Hi all, Here I include an RFC for control flow sensitive AutoFDO (FS-AFDO). This is a joint work with David Li. Questions and feedback are welcome. Thanks, Rong ============= [RFC] Control Flow Sensitive AutoFDO (FS-AFDO) 1. Motivation AFDO profile is derived from PMU samples from running an earlier build binary. PMU samples are indexed by the IP addresses. An offline tool uses the debug