similar to: [LLVMdev] buildbot with -vectorize

On 02/05/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > I think that it would be a good idea to have a buildbot set up to run > the test suite with -vectorize. Could one of the existing machines do > this also? It took some time, but we have this now: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-darwin10-nt-O3-vectorize The first run shows that there are a couple of test-suite failures with the

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:15:12 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 02/05/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > I think that it would be a good idea to have a buildbot set up to > > run the test suite with -vectorize. Could one of the existing > > machines do this also? > > It took some time, but we have this now: > >

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 01:03:46 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/20/2012 11:07 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:15:12 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > >> On 02/05/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> I think that it would be a good idea to have a buildbot set up to >

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 08:17:32 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/24/2012 05:42 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > >> On 06/21/2012 04:23 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 01:03:46 +0200 > >>> Tobias

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/21/2012 04:23 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 01:03:46 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > >> On 06/20/2012 11:07 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:15:12 +0200 > >>> Tobias

On 06/24/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 08:17:32 +0200 > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 06/24/2012 05:42 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 >>> Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >>> >>>> On 06/21/2012 04:23 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>>

On 06/20/2012 11:07 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:15:12 +0200 > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 02/05/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> I think that it would be a good idea to have a buildbot set up to >>> run the test suite with -vectorize. Could one of the existing >>> machines do this also? >>

On 06/21/2012 04:23 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 01:03:46 +0200 > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 06/20/2012 11:07 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:15:12 +0200 >>> Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >>> >>>> On 02/05/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>>

On 06/24/2012 05:42 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 06/21/2012 04:23 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 01:03:46 +0200 >>> Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >>> >>>> On 06/20/2012 11:07 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>>

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:44:45 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/24/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 08:17:32 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > >> On 06/24/2012 05:42 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 > >>> Tobias

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:44:45 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/24/2012 02:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 08:17:32 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > >> On 06/24/2012 05:42 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:25:13 +0200 > >>> Tobias

On 06/28/2012 02:51 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:44:45 +0200 > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > [..] > Also, since you're running these on an x86_64 machine, and I think they > don't have unaligned vector load/stores, you should probably add -mllvm > -bb-vectorize-aligned-only to the target flags. What about MOVUPS and MOVUPD? Tobi

Hi, as we got again more activity regarding performance testing and especially LNT, I wanted to get out an idea I had since a while, but where I neither had nor have the time or hardware to implement it. The buildbot infrastructure provides so called 'try' builds, that allow a developer to submit patches they want to check for correctness or performance before actually committing

I will take a peek at the server log. On Jan 16, 2014, at 4:09 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 01/17/2014 01:07 AM, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 01/17/2014 12:59 AM, Chris Matthews wrote: >>> Do you guys have examples of a LNT results file that causes the failure? >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> thanks for the quick reply. Here a link

On 01/17/2014 12:59 AM, Chris Matthews wrote: > Do you guys have examples of a LNT results file that causes the failure? Hi Chris, thanks for the quick reply. Here a link to the most recent failing results file: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-perf-O3/builds/704/steps/lnt.nightly-test/logs/report.json Please download it as the buildbots will delete it at some point. Tobias

On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:04:38 +0200 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > On 06/28/2012 02:51 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:44:45 +0200 > > Tobias Grosser<tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > > [..] > > > Also, since you're running these on an x86_64 machine, and I think > > they don't have unaligned vector

On 01/16/2014 11:47 PM, Chris Matthews wrote: > The error you are seeing there is the client side error of a server side exception. It is probably best to address the actual failure. Those will probably be in the apache log on the server. > > That said, I think if a bot really is just for testing and not performance there is no harm in not submitting the results. I have the same

On 11/08/2011 11:29 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 20:24 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 11/08/2011 03:36 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 12:12 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>>> On 11/08/2011 11:45 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: [A lot of performance results skipped] OK. As expected part of the speedup is because of unrolling, however it

Hi Hal, this is one of the first test cases, I would love to have improved vectorizer support. I sent it out earlier, but I think it is a good time to look into it again, after the vectorizer was committed. The basic examples is a set of scalar loads that load for consecutive elements and store them back right ahead. For me this is an obvious case where vectorization is beneficial

Hi Hal, I add a function named "vectorizeBasicBlock" which allow users to perform basic block vectoirzation inside their pass. But i am not sure whether i missed something as no one use the function right now (But it will be used by Polly sometimes later[1]). In addition, we (tobi and me) also want to make the vectorizer being configured command line flags. To achieve this, we are