similar to: [LLVMdev] Problem with DragonEgg 3.3rc2 on Fedora 19 Beta

Hi Eric, On 03/06/13 08:50, Eric Smith wrote: > I'm the package maintainer for DragonEgg for Fedora. I've just tried to update > the DragonEgg package for Fedora 19 beta, which uses gcc 4.8.0. > > I had to modify the DragonEgg Makefile because llvm-config --libs is generating > the names of the static libraries, while I need to link to the dynamic library >

Hi LLVM and GCC developers, My sincere thanks will goto: * Duncan, the core developer of llvm-gcc and dragonegg http://llvm.org/devmtg/2009-10/Sands_LLVMGCCPlugin.pdf * David, the innovator and developer of GCC https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/global-state/requirements.html and others who give me kind response for teaching me patiently and carefully about how to migrate GCC v4.8.x to

Hello All, Another newbie question. I am confused as to what options will work with "fplugin-arg-dragonegg-llvm-option" for dragonegg plugin. Readme says it is used to pass command-line options to llvm. I shall consolidate into 3 questions. For all examples below, I used combo- gcc 4.6 + dragonegg(trunk) + llvm(trunk) (1). Does 'fplugin-arg-dragonegg-llvm-option' allow all

Hello All, Another newbie question. I am confused as to what options will work with "fplugin-arg-dragonegg-llvm-option" for dragonegg plugin. Readme says it is used to pass command-line options to llvm. I shall consolidate into 3 questions. For all examples below, I used combo- gcc 4.6 + dragonegg(trunk) + llvm(trunk) (1). Does 'fplugin-arg-dragonegg-llvm-option' allow all

Now that dragoneegg is robust in its default usage and the dragonegg svn is moderately stable with -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns, it is possible to gauge the impact of that feature. Comparing clang 2.9, FSF gcc 4.5.3svn, FSF gcc 4.6.0 and dragonegg svn with FSF gcc 4.5.3svn using the himenoBMTxpa benchmark, the enhancement to code performance from

Hi Jack, > Duncan, any idea how to work around that for passing -bb-vectorize-req-chain-depth=3? it is being rejected by GCC's plugin options parser. I just implemented a hack in dragonegg in which colons will be morphed into equals signs. So you should now be able to pass -bb-vectorize-req-chain-depth:3 and have it work. Ciao, Duncan.

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 08:47:26PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > Duncan, > Here are the complete benchmarks rerun against gcc 4.5.4 built with... > > Using built-in specs. > COLLECT_GCC=gfortran-fsf-4.5 > COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/sw/lib/gcc4.5/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin11.0.0/4.5.4/lto-wrapper > Target: x86_64-apple-darwin11.0.0 > Configured with:

Current dragonegg svn has all of the -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns bugs for usage with -ffast-math -O3 addressed except for those related to PR2314. Using the -fno-tree-vectorize option, we can evaluate the current state of -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns with the Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks compared to stock dragonegg and stock gcc 4.5.4. The runtime benchmarks below show that

Hi Jack, > Now that dragoneegg is robust in its default usage and the dragonegg svn > is moderately stable with -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns, it is > possible to gauge the impact of that feature. Comparing clang 2.9, FSF gcc 4.5.3svn, > FSF gcc 4.6.0 and dragonegg svn with FSF gcc 4.5.3svn using the himenoBMTxpa benchmark, > the enhancement to code performance from

On 11/08/2010 03:18 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Tobias, > >> I am very interested in using dragonegg as a fortran frontend for the >> LLVM test >> suite, as a start to improve fortran support. >> >> I believe this should be easy, but when I looked into this I had the >> impression >> the nightly tester in the llvm test-suite does not even support

Hi all, I tried using dragonegg to compile some numerical software of ours. I tried out two different approaches expecting both would yield the same results: 1. gfortran-4.6 -fplugin=dragonegg-3.0 -o test.o test.f (I ommitted a bunch of additional arguments for brevity) 2. gfortran-4.6 -fplugin=dragonegg-3.0 -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-emit-ir -S -o test.ll test.f llc -O0 -o test.s test.ll as

Duncan, Here are the complete benchmarks rerun against gcc 4.5.4 built with... Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gfortran-fsf-4.5 COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/sw/lib/gcc4.5/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin11.0.0/4.5.4/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-apple-darwin11.0.0 Configured with: ../gcc-4.5.4/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.5 --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc4.5/info

On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 08:57:51 -0400 Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Jack, > > > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current > >> llvm/dragonegg svn on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode > >> 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > >

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:53:19AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, > > > Now that dragoneegg is robust in its default usage and the dragonegg svn > > is moderately stable with -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns, it is > > possible to gauge the impact of that feature. Comparing clang 2.9, FSF gcc 4.5.3svn, > > FSF gcc 4.6.0 and dragonegg svn with FSF

Hi Jack, thanks for these numbers. Can you also please measure compile times? I'm thinking of enabling gcc optimizations by default, but I don't want to increase compile times, which means choosing a value for the -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-llvm-ir-optimize option that is low enough to get good compile times, yet high enough to get fast code. It would be great if you could play around with

Duncan, Is the documentation for using Polly support in dragonegg correct? I built llvm/polly/dragonegg using the documentation at http://polly.llvm.org/example_load_Polly_into_dragonegg.html with... GCC=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/bin/gcc-4 LLVM_CONFIG=/sw/opt/llvm-3.2/bin/llvm-config ENABLE_LLVM_PLUGINS=1 make CPPFLAGS="-DENABLE_LTO -I/sw/include" The resulting dragonegg plugin works fine

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn >> on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > thanks for the numbers. How does this compare to LLVM 3.0 - were there any > regressions? The results from just before

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 08:33:33AM -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 08:57:51 -0400 > Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > > Hi Jack, > > > > > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current > > >> llvm/dragonegg svn

On 4/9/2011 6:09 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, thanks for the numbers. Any chance of analysing why gcc does better on > those where it does much better than dragonegg? > > Ciao, Duncan. Also, does -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns get Dragonegg to match GCC performance where GCC was faster? Marcus

On 10/20/2012 05:38 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > Duncan, > Is the documentation for using Polly support in dragonegg correct? I built llvm/polly/dragonegg > using the documentation at http://polly.llvm.org/example_load_Polly_into_dragonegg.html > with... > > GCC=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/bin/gcc-4 LLVM_CONFIG=/sw/opt/llvm-3.2/bin/llvm-config ENABLE_LLVM_PLUGINS=1 make