Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] How to find the first block of each loop"
2017 Mar 31
4
Dereferenceable load semantics & LICM
Hi Piotr,
On March 31, 2017 at 1:07:12 PM, Piotr Padlewski
(piotr.padlewski at gmail.com) wrote:
> [snip]
> Do I understand it correctly, that it is legal to do the hoist because all
> of the instructions above %vtable does not throw?
Yes, I think you're right. HeaderMayThrow is a conservative
approximation, and the conservativeness is biting us here.
> Are there any plans to
2017 Apr 03
4
Dereferenceable load semantics & LICM
2017-04-01 15:59 GMT+02:00 Piotr Padlewski <piotr.padlewski at gmail.com>:
>
>
> 2017-03-31 23:20 GMT+02:00 Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>:
>
>> Hi Piotr,
>>
>> On March 31, 2017 at 1:07:12 PM, Piotr Padlewski
>> (piotr.padlewski at gmail.com) wrote:
>> > [snip]
>> > Do I understand it correctly, that it is legal to
2007 Aug 07
2
array
Hello,
I have some files generated from microarray experiments. I used scan() to
read the files, and assigned each file to a unique name with many rows and
columns. Now I want to create a array (ArrayA) with unique names, and I can
use ArrayA[1,2][[6]] to refer the data in each file. Is there any packages
available for array of array?
Thanks!
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
2017 Mar 31
2
Dereferenceable load semantics & LICM
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com
> wrote:
> Hi Piotr,
>
> On March 31, 2017 at 9:07:42 AM, Piotr Padlewski
> (piotr.padlewski at gmail.com) wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I have a question about dereferenceable metadata on load instruction. I
> > have a patch (https://reviews.llvm.org/D31539) for LICM that hoists
>
2012 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may
be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution
tests in LLVM):
diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
index daf7742..b10fab2 100644
--- a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
+++ b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
@@ -4293,9 +4293,15 @@
2012 Feb 08
2
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
Attached
2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>:
> Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may
> be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution
> tests in LLVM):
>
> diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
> index daf7742..b10fab2 100644
> ---
2012 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
Your patch should include a testcase, see test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution for
examples. "BranchInst* " should be "BranchInst *". You should have spaces
after the // in your comments. One of the comment lines isn't indented
properly.
Nick
On 8 February 2012 12:05, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote:
> Attached
>
> 2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni
2012 Feb 08
2
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more
as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid
solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up
the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion.
Thanks!
Marcello
2012/2/9 Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com>:
> Your patch should include a testcase,
2012 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
On 8 February 2012 15:50, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more
> as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid
> solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up
> the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion.
>
I'm
2012 Feb 08
2
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
Hello, I'm finding problems with BackEdgeTaken count calculation in
even simple fortran loops with gfortran-4.6 + DragonEgg 3.0.
Even for simple double loops like this one:
program test2
integer i,j,k
dimension k(100,100)
do j=1,100
do i=1,100
k(i,j) = i
enddo
enddo
write(*,*) k(1,30)
end
make the ScalarEvolution
2012 Feb 09
2
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what
you are saying.
This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block
doesn't have a unique predecessor, but because the unique predecessor
(the inner loop block) has a successor that is inside the loop (in
this case itself, because it's the inner loop block).
That doesn't change, anyway, the assuption that
2012 Feb 09
0
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the
problem (attached)
Also a more conforming patch has been attached
2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>:
> This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what
> you are saying.
> This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block
> doesn't have a unique predecessor,
2012 Feb 09
1
[LLVMdev] BackedgeTakenCount calculation for fortran loops and DragonEgg gfortran-4.6
FInally I had the time to complete everything up. Now I included the
test case in the patch and the testcase runs with the LLVM tests
system.
2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>:
> This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the
> problem (attached)
> Also a more conforming patch has been attached
>
> 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms
2004 Aug 05
4
newest up2date rpm
i updated to the latest up2date rpm....
then when updating to the latest kernel
this is what happened after i ran up2date -fu
for the kernel/kernel-source updates
Testing package set / solving RPM inter-dependencies...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/sbin/up2date", line 1174, in ?
sys.exit(main() or 0)
File "/usr/sbin/up2date", line 772, in main
2005 Aug 26
1
wchar and wstring.
Hello all, I am writing an R interface to some C++ files which make use
of std::wstring classes for internationalization. Previously (when I
wanted to make R strings from C++ std::strings), I would do something
like this to construct a string in R from the results of the parse.
SET_VECTOR_ELT(vals, i++, mkString(header.GetHeader().c_str()));
However, now the call header.GetHeader().c_str()
2007 Oct 06
3
Prototype: resp.getHeader('Location'); redirects browser
Why when I call resp.getHeader(''Location''); after my ajax call does
the browser get redirected to the location header. I just want to get
the value of it.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
2013 Mar 12
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On
2013 Mar 12
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM,
2013 Mar 27
1
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA (new version)
Hello,
After discussions with Daniel, Dan and others, here is an updated proposal for struct-access-path aware TBAA.
Given an example
struct A {
int x;
int y;
};
struct B {
A a;
int z;
};
struct C {
B b1;
B b2;
int *p;
};
struct D {
C c;
};
The purpose of struct-path-aware TBAA is to say
"C::b1.a" will alias with "B::a.x", "C::b1.a" will alias with
2015 May 14
4
[LLVMdev] getnode(BB) = 0; block already in dominator tree
Hi
I run into an issue as part of splitting a critical edge during LICM.
When a new basic block is created and needs to be added into the dominator
tree, the block is already in the dominator tree. I print the dominator
tree and I see it is added into the tree as child of node it is supposed to
dominate.
How do I debug to find out why/when its getting added into the tree. ?
Tips/suggestions on