Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [RFC/PATCH][0/4] New SystemZ backend"
2013 Apr 14
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC/PATCH][0/4] New SystemZ backend
> I'd like to propose the addition of a new SystemZ backend to the LLVM and
> Clang code base. We're interested in this for the same reason we've been
> interested in the PowerPC back-end recently: to enable packages in upcoming
> enterprise Linux distributions that need LLVM support (e.g. 3D desktop
> support via llvmpipe).
Cool!
> - focus on feature completeness
2014 Apr 10
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Move host CPU auto-detection out of the TargetMachine
Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> writes:
> I'm not a huge fan of this because then you get to decide on a default
> for all the ports, but I can understand if people want to move this
> way to reduce uncertainty.
FWIW, since it's one of the three targets Jim mentioned, -march=z10 is
the obvious default for SystemZ.
On the other hand, I think it's good to run
2014 Apr 08
4
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Move host CPU auto-detection out of the TargetMachine
All,
Currently the X86 backend does CPU auto-detection and subtarget feature detection when the TargetMachine is created if no explicit CPU was specified. It's counterintuitive for low level tools like ‘llc’ to do this, as it means the same .ll file compiled on heterogenous machines generates different results from the same ‘llc’ command line. It is still useful to be able to opt-in to such
2011 Jan 30
2
[LLVMdev] question on assembler for systemz backend
What assembler are people using with the SystemZ backend?
I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU
binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux). I get errors when
assembling instructions with literals that are negatives. For example,
the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors:
$ s390x-as 01-RetImm.s
01-RetImm.s: Assembler messages:
2011 Jan 30
0
[LLVMdev] question on assembler for systemz backend
Hello
> I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU
> binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux). I get errors when
> assembling instructions with literals that are negatives. For example,
> the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors:
There are different instruction sets for z/System. Basically, you have
to provide proper -march
2011 Jan 30
2
[LLVMdev] question on assembler for systemz backend
Hi Anton,
On 01/30/2011 12:44 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
> Hello
>
>> I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU
>> binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux). I get errors when
>> assembling instructions with literals that are negatives. For example,
>> the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors:
>
2013 May 03
1
MANOVA summary.manova(m) :" residuals have rank"
Dear All, I am trying to perform MANOVA. I have table with 504 columns(species) and 36 rows) with two grouping (season and location)
Zx <- Z[c(4:504)]
Zxm <- as.matrix(Z)
m<- manova(Zxm~Season*location, data=Z)
when I do summary.aov, I get respond for each species but summary.manova
summary.manova(m) :" residuals have rank" 24<501.
What can it be the reason for this error
2015 Aug 14
2
[3.7 Release] Let's fix the release notes!
Many thanks!
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Ulrich Weigand
<Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com> wrote:
> LLVM:
>
> LLVM no longer attempts to automatically detect the
> current host CPU when invoked natively.
>
> LLVM now supports all thread-local storage models on SystemZ.
> (Previous releases would support only the local-exec TLS model.)
>
> LLVM now uses the POPCNT
2013 Apr 14
1
[LLVMdev] [RFC/PATCH][1/4] New SystemZ backend: LLVM code changes
Hello,
this set of patches adds SystemZ support to base LLVM. This is split up
into three patches just to simplify review; they should be committed as a
single change if approved.
The first patch adds SystemZ support to the configure logic and support for
the systemz Triple. This ought to be straightfoward.
The second patch adds changes to LLVM common code required to support the
SystemZ ELF
2015 Aug 13
17
[3.7 Release] Let's fix the release notes!
Dear everyone,
The in-progress release notes for 3.7 [1,2] make it look like we
didn't do very much over the past six months. Obviously that's not the
case at all, so let's get them in shape!
If you've been thinking "I should probably add this to the release
notes at some point", now is the time :-)
I have a list below of changes that might be worth mentioning. I
2015 Mar 30
2
[LLVMdev] Removing TargetMachine CPU auto-detection for PowerPC and SystemZ?
Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote on 23.03.2015 19:42:06:
> > >Attached are draft patches that do this for X86. Similar but smaller
> > >cleanups can also be done for SystemZ and PowerPC if it’s agreed
> > >this is a good idea.
> >
> > However, this was then never implemented for SystemZ and PowerPC.
> > Should we do so as well?
>
>
2013 Nov 14
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Add a Scalarize pass
On Nov 14, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>> Are you worried that adding it to PMB will increase compile time?
>> The pass exits very early for any target that doesn't opt-in to doing
>> scalarisation at the IR level, without even looking at the function.
2013 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] Is there pass to break down <4 x float> to scalars
Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> writes:
> Hi, LLVM community,
>
> I write some code in hand using LLVM IR. for simplicity, I write them in <4
> x float>. now I found some stores for elements are useless.
>
> for example, If I store {0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0} to a <4 x float> %a. maybe
> only %a.xy is alive in my program. our target doesn't feature SIMD
>
2015 Dec 03
1
Question Regarding SystemZ Implementation Missing Instructions
Hi All,
I had some questions regarding the SystemZ implementation and missing
instructions.
I've been comparing the IBM z/Architecture Reference Summary (SA22-7871-08)
to the output of
"llvm-tblgen SystemZ.td -print-enums -class=Instruction" and noticed that
there's 525 missing instructions.
For example, if I look at instruction "M" (page 16) with opcode 0x5c (M
2013 Nov 15
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Add a Scalarize pass
Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> writes:
> On Nov 14, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Richard Sandiford
> <rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>>> Are you worried that adding it to PMB will increase compile time?
>>> The pass exits very early for any target that doesn't opt-in to doing
2014 Dec 18
2
[LLVMdev] Code ownership for SystemZ port
Richard Sandiford wrote:
>I'd like to step down as code owner for the SystemZ port and nominate
>Ulrich Weigand to take over. Sorry for not doing this sooner.
I'd be happy to take over that role.
Thanks for all your work on SystemZ, Richard!
Bye,
Ulrich
2009 May 21
2
Naming a random effect in lmer
Dear guRus:
I am using lmer for a mixed model that includes a random intercept for a
set of effects that have the same distribution, Normal(0, sig2b). This set
of effects is of variable size, so I am using an as.formula statement to
create the formula for lmer. For example, if the set of random effects has
dimension 8, then the lmer call is:
Zs<-
2011 Jan 30
1
[LLVMdev] question on assembler for systemz backend
On 01/30/2011 02:09 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
>> I'd still like to know if anyone has sucessfully assembled SystemZ generated
>> assembly language with a binutils assembler, and if so, how.
> Almost all testsuite passed ~ 1.5 years ago (with clang + gas). I
> doubt anyone tried to assembler anything else after that time.
>
Lots of things have changed in 1.5 years with
2011 Jan 30
0
[LLVMdev] question on assembler for systemz backend
> I'd still like to know if anyone has sucessfully assembled SystemZ generated
> assembly language with a binutils assembler, and if so, how.
Almost all testsuite passed ~ 1.5 years ago (with clang + gas). I
doubt anyone tried to assembler anything else after that time.
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
2015 Mar 23
2
[LLVMdev] Removing TargetMachine CPU auto-detection for PowerPC and SystemZ?
Hi Hal,
I only just noticed that about a year ago, Jim removed CPU auto-detection
for the X86 target:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-April/071991.html
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140407/212676.html
>Currently the X86 backend does CPU auto-detection and subtarget feature
>detection when the TargetMachine is created if no explicit CPU was