Displaying 20 results from an estimated 300 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer"
2013 Feb 11
2
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer
Jonas,
At this point, the DFA packetizer models a simple VLIW architecture and
does not accommodate multiple stages. That's the reason for the behavior
you're seeing.
-Anshu
---
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
*From:*llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
*On Behalf Of *Jonas
2013 Feb 12
0
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer
Hi,
I looked a bit through the mail archives, and found this question answered in Oct 2011 (see below). It is interesting to find this in the ARM backend, considering your answer. Can you give more information about for example is this a temporary deficiency in the DFAPacketizer? What is the IIC_iMOVi itinerary doing below?
Thanks,
Jonas
Thu Oct 6 15:11:25 CDT 2011:
Hello Hal.
> Is there
2013 Feb 18
0
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer
Hi Anshu,
Would there be any interest in extending this algorithm to handling more extensive models, such as VLIW scheduling based on FU's and bundle space... ie handle multiple stages ?
I might do it and commit, if there is acceptance and guidance...
Jonas
________________________________
From: Anshuman Dasgupta [mailto:adasgupt at codeaurora.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:47 PM
2013 Feb 12
2
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer
Hi Jonas,
> It is interesting to find this in the ARM backend, considering your
answer.
The ARM backend doesn't use the DFA packetizer. It's only used by
Hexagon. At this point, there is no plan to address thisin the DFA
packetizer since none of the supported targets needthe functionality.
Thanks
-Anshu
---
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
2014 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] Question about per-operand machine model
Hi Andy and all,
I have a question about per-operand machine model. I am finding some
relations between 'MCWriteLatencyEntry' and 'MCWriteProcResEntry'.
For example,
class InstTEST<..., InstrItinClass itin> : Instruction {
let Itinerary = Itin;
}
// I assume this MI writes 2 registers.
def TESTINST : InstTEST<..., II_TEST>
// schedule info
II_TEST:
2015 Nov 16
2
DFAPacketizer assert failure
For some reason on my VLIW target DFAPacketizer fails at
assert(CachedTable.count(StateTrans) != 0);
in the following function:
// reserveResources - Reserve the resources occupied by a MCInstrDesc and
// change the current state to reflect that change.
void DFAPacketizer::reserveResources(const llvm::MCInstrDesc *MID) {
unsigned InsnClass = MID->getSchedClass();
const llvm::InstrStage
2012 Jun 12
0
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer with StateTrans != 0 Assertion
Hi Sam,
On 12/06/2012 15:33, sam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to get the DFAPacketizer to work for my target but with any
> instruction I get the
> 'Assertion `CachedTable.count(StateTrans) != 0' failed' error and it crashes
> out before packeting a single instruction.
Do you reserve some resource without verification?
Note that reserveResources() should be
2012 Jun 12
0
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer with StateTrans != 0 Assertion
Hi sam,
On 12/06/2012 17:30, sam wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
>
> The assertion was happening because I wasn't checking after the first
> attempt failed. The first packet was failing and so it was ended, and
> then the packetizer attempted to add it to the next packet without
> checking for available resources. However this highlights probably the
> real problem - my packetizer
2007 Mar 06
1
Merging stats from multiple databases for expand
In matcher/expandweight.cc we have:
OmExpandBits
operator+(const OmExpandBits &bits1, const OmExpandBits &bits2)
{
OmExpandBits sum(bits1);
sum.multiplier += bits2.multiplier;
sum.rtermfreq += bits2.rtermfreq;
// FIXME - try to share this information rather than pick half of it
if (bits2.dbsize > sum.dbsize) {
DEBUGLINE(WTCALC,
2012 Jun 12
3
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer with StateTrans != 0 Assertion
Hi Ivan,
The assertion was happening because I wasn't checking after the first
attempt failed. The first packet was failing and so it was ended, and
then the packetizer attempted to add it to the next packet without
checking for available resources. However this highlights probably the
real problem - my packetizer is unable to find resources for the first
instruction, or any of my
2012 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] Target Dependent Hexagon Packetizer patch
Sure I will split it and put it in two patches.
Give me few hours. I need to test those patches.
Sirish
On 4/19/2012 8:40 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:18:05PM -0500, Sirish Pande wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here's a patch for Hexagon Packetizer for review. This patch does
>> not yield any warnings.
>>
> Would it be possible to split this
2020 Apr 20
2
ORC JIT Weekly #12
Hi All,
There was only one interesting ORC-specific commit this week: A new example
showing how to initialize and de-initialize JITDylibs has been added in
llvm/examples/OrcV2Examples/LLJITWithInitializers.
The Extensible RTTI system (https://reviews.llvm.org/D39111) that I posted
a while back has landed. While this is not ORC specific, I expect it to be
used in upcoming patches to allow ORC
2020 Oct 02
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi Andres,
Ok -- I've added some API for this in 438db0719681: You can get the string
pool from the execution session
with LLVMOrcExecutionSessionGetSymbolStringPool, then clear that
with LLVMOrcSymbolStringPoolClearDeadEntries.
-- Lang.
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 5:34 PM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andres,
>
> Oooh. I think I see. For various reasons the symbol
2012 Jun 12
2
[LLVMdev] DFAPacketizer with StateTrans != 0 Assertion
Hi,
I'm trying to get the DFAPacketizer to work for my target but with any
instruction I get the
'Assertion `CachedTable.count(StateTrans) != 0' failed' error and it crashes
out before packeting a single instruction.
I have a *GenDFAPacketizer.inc file and my packetizer pass checks that the
table is not empty before proceeding. I also have a schedule file with my
functional
2020 Oct 01
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi,
On 2020-10-01 15:29:12 -0700, Lang Hames wrote:
> 24bytes / object -- Looks like I managed module ownership correctly but
> leaked the ThreadSafeModule container. This should be fixed in 5044196b412f.
That helped a bit, but not yet fully. Looks like it might be still
reachable memory, so leakcheck isn't that helpful.
Oooh. I think I see. For various reasons the symbol names we
2020 Sep 16
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi Andres,
Cool!I assume this works on "non-native" jitlink platforms as well? Or
> just mach?
This framework is totally materializer agnostic -- It works for
ObjectLinkingLayer (JITLink), RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer (RuntimeDyld), and
even materializers that aren't emitted via a linker (e.g. stubs and
callbacks).
Looks like there's not yet a C API yet - not a problem, just
2020 Sep 24
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi All,
The Kaleidoscope tutorials have now been updated on the orcv1-removal
branch. I will try to summarise the state of the work and provide some
examples in the ORC JIT Weekly mailout tomorrow. The short version is that
I think this is ready to land on the mainline.
If anyone wants to check out the OrcV1 removal branch and provide feedback
now is the time. Otherwise I will aim to land the
2011 Oct 22
0
[LLVMdev] Instruction Scheduling Itineraries
On Oct 21, 2011, at 12:15 AM, James Molloy wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Could you describe how this would be done? In the current ARM itineraries
> (say C-A9 for example), the superscalar issue stage is modelled as taking 1
> cycle. If it were to take 2 cycles instead, as far as I can tell the hazard
> analyser would stall because both FU's would be acquired.
>
> I would
2020 Oct 01
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi,
On 2020-09-30 19:00:45 -0700, Lang Hames wrote:
> Ok -- I'll make getting the new lookup API working a priority then.
Cool.
> > I see a memory leak with OrcV2 that I didn't see with V1. I'm not yet
> > sure where exactly they're coming from. Possible that I'm just missing a
> > step somewhere. Or something around the removable code support
2020 Sep 16
4
OrcV1 removal
Hi All,
I've updated the orcv1 removal branch (
https://github.com/lhames/llvm-project/tree/orcv1-removal) with an initial
patch for removable code. If anyone wants to follow along with the
development or share thoughts on the design you're very welcome to.
I'll be adding tests and comments this week, but for anyone who wants to
take an early look the main elements are defined in