similar to: [LLVMdev] Problems about developing LLVM pass on windows visual studio

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yin Ma" <yinma at codeaurora.org> > To: "Andrew Trick" <atrick at apple.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 4:21:50 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Suggestion About Adding Target Dependent Decision in LSR Please > > > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Actually,

Hi Andy, Actually, if we just add hooks that preserves the existing behavior, It is not difficult. For example, For case one, we can define one function like virtual const SCEV* getTargetPreferredWinnerReg(const SCEV*& ScaledReg, SmallVector<const SCEV *, 4>& BaseRegs, GlobalValue*& BaseGV) const; In NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs, we can

On Mar 13, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Yin Ma <yinma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi All, > > In the target I am working, we comes cross a situation that the loop strength reduction > could deliver a better result but currently not, because > 1. the algorithm narrows search space by winner registers without considering > the target preferred format.

Hi All, In the target I am working, we comes cross a situation that the loop strength reduction could deliver a better result but currently not, because 1. the algorithm narrows search space by winner registers without considering the target preferred format. (NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs) 2. Cost comparison solely favors the number register without considering other

I have a few questions regarding cost calculation in loop strength reduction. 1. Ignoring LSR uses of kind ICmpZero. These usually come from the loop latch conditions. On Hexagon most loops that would contain such a LSR use are going to be converted to hardware loops and the entire check will disappear. There is no need to analyze these cases in LSR. In fact, completely ignoring them improves

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Qun Fa <testforqunfa at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Alexey. I will try this out this week. Any idea on supporting > this for Mac? > > My raw idea is to add this to compiler-rt/lib/profile/CMakeLists.txt > > if(APPLE) > foreach(arch ${PROFILE_SUPPORTED_ARCH}) > add_compiler_rt_static_runtime(clang_rt.profile-${arch} ${arch}

Thank you Alexey. I will try this out this week. Any idea on supporting this for Mac? My raw idea is to add this to compiler-rt/lib/profile/CMakeLists.txt if(APPLE) foreach(arch ${PROFILE_SUPPORTED_ARCH}) add_compiler_rt_static_runtime(clang_rt.profile-${arch} ${arch} SOURCES ${PROFILE_SOURCES} CFLAGS --sysroot=${COMPILER_RT_DARWIN_SDK_SYSROOT}) endforeach() endif() Do you

Thank you Alexey. I have tried to use Makefile. This will generate the correct symbols that I need. Any idea on the schedule of adding CMake support to compiler-rt? Sincerely, Qun On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com>wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Qun Fa <testforqunfa at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >>

Hi! On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Qun Fa <testforqunfa at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Alexey. > > I have tried to use Makefile. This will generate the correct symbols that > I need. > > Any idea on the schedule of adding CMake support to compiler-rt? > Starting from r177382 CMake on Linux should build the same profile compiler-rt library as Makefiles. >

Googling for `rw1061.exe' turned up: http://www.cipic.ucdavis.edu/~dmrocke/Class/EAD289D/R/rw1061.exe Andy > From: Qun Shi > > Hi Andy, > > Thanks a lot for your promptly response. I searched the whole > web site, I > found the source code for version 1.6.X. Since I'm not a > computer person, > I don't how to compile it, but what I want is binary file

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Qun Fa <testforqunfa at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I think Nick's suggestion is correct, my code was linked against > libprofile_rt.a, which had gcda profiling code before, but was removed > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/218042a02305a3cc38d968a97ff9ecf4b4abe6ff > > So, I couldn't find the correct symbols from

Hi All, I think Nick's suggestion is correct, my code was linked against libprofile_rt.a, which had gcda profiling code before, but was removed https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/218042a02305a3cc38d968a97ff9ecf4b4abe6ff So, I couldn't find the correct symbols from libprofile_rt.a any more. Now my assumption is I need to use the correct library that is provided by compiler-rt.

Sources for versions of R as far back as 0.65, I believe, are available on CRAN. You can try to compile from source. Andy > From: Qun Shi > > Hi, > > I'm trying to use the version of dchip combined with R to > analyze my data. > I need R version 1.6 which fits for dchip as dchip manual said. So I > would appreciate a lot if someone could tell me where I could

Hi all, I have been looking at the code for both the zaptel driver (wctdm.c/wcfxs.c) and the asterisk channel driver (chan_zap.c) trying to figure out how much of this that has been implemented. So far I can see that the current stable 1.0.9.1 zaptel driver don't have the SETPOLARITY ioctl that would be required to properly signal the Swedish/Dutch CLIP, but the 1.2 beta1 has this

Thanks for your reply. May I know which is the recommended library that should be linked against? I am currently linking libprofile_rt.a. And I have noticed the differences that, if we do `nm libprofile_rt.a | grep llvm` with my old copy of the llvm/clang installation, I can see 00000000000005e0 T _llvm_gcda_emit_arcs 0000000000000b48 S _llvm_gcda_emit_arcs.eh 0000000000000430 T

Hi, I am trying to test my project and get the code coverage with a version of clang compiler that was built from the latest llvm/clang codebase. It worked for a while. But today, after I updated my local checkout, and re-build llvm, clang and compiler-rt, when I test my project again, I got the errors with undefined reference to 'llvm_gcda_start_file', 'llvm_gcda_emit_arcs',

Qun Fa wrote: > Hi, > I am trying to test my project and get the code coverage with a version > of clang compiler that was built from the latest llvm/clang codebase. > > It worked for a while. But today, after I updated my local checkout, and > re-build llvm, clang and compiler-rt, when I test my project again, I > got the errors with undefined reference to

Hello, find enclosed a first patch for adding tail call optimizations for thumb1 targets. I assume that this list is the right place for publishing patches for review? Since this is my first proposal for LLVM, I'd very much appreciate your feedback. What the patch is meant to do: For Tail calls identified during DAG generation, the target address will be loaded into a register by use

[correction] On May 20, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > All, > > The following IR is causing the assert: > > \begin{ll} > ; ModuleID = 'x.bc' > target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32- > i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64- > f80:128:128" > target triple =

Hi, I was building LLVM with gcc 6.1.1 recently and it was spitting out some warnings relating to misleading indention that caught my eye. This wasn't a fresh build so I may have missed some. I've CC'ed the authors of the potentially misleading lines so they can decide what do about the warnings (if anything). I'm wondering if clang-format is making some inappropriate choices