similar to: [LLVMdev] [Polly] Question about Polly's speed up on huffbench.c without optimization and code generation

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [Polly] Question about Polly's speed up on huffbench.c without optimization and code generation"

2013 Aug 06
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Question about Polly's speed up on huffbench.c without optimization and code generation
On 08/05/2013 08:08 PM, Star Tan wrote: > Hi all, > > > It seems that Polly could still speed up test-suite/SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/huffbench.c even without any optimization and code generation. Our evaluation show that when compiled with "clang -Xclang -load -Xclang LLVMPolly.so -mllvm -polly -mllvm -polly-optimizer=none -mllvm -polly-code-generator=none", the
2013 Sep 08
2
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
Hello all, I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. Detailed results for SCEV and default canonicalization can be viewed on: http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/32 (or 33, 34) *pNoGen with SCEV canonicalization (run 32): -O3 -Xclang -load
2013 Sep 08
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: > Hello all, > > > I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. Interesting. > Detailed results for SCEV and default canonicalization can be viewed on: http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/32 (or
2013 Sep 13
2
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
At 2013-09-09 13:07:07,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: >> >> At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> >>> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >>> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >>> the
2013 Apr 17
2
[LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering
Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 04/17/2013 05:53 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > >Hi, > > > >polly is run very early and schedules the following passes before it runs: > > > >/// @brief Schedule a set of canonicalization passes to prepare for Polly > >/// > >/// The set of optimization passes was partially taken/copied from the > >/// set of default
2013 Sep 14
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
Hello all, I have evaluated the compile-time and execution-time performance of Polly canonicalization passes. Details can be referred to http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/recent_activity. There are four runs: pollyBasic (run 45): clang -O3 -Xclang -load -Xclang LLVMPolly.so pollyNoGenSCEV (run 44): clang -O3 -Xclang -load -Xclang LLVMPolly.so -mllvm -polly -mllvm -polly-codegen-scev
2013 Apr 17
3
[LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering
Hi, polly is run very early and schedules the following passes before it runs: /// @brief Schedule a set of canonicalization passes to prepare for Polly /// /// The set of optimization passes was partially taken/copied from the /// set of default optimization passes in LLVM. It is used to bring the code /// into a canonical form that simplifies the analysis and optimization passes /// of Polly.
2013 Sep 09
4
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> >> I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. > >Interesting. > >>
2013 Apr 17
0
[LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering
On 04/17/2013 05:53 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > Hi, > > polly is run very early and schedules the following passes before it runs: > > /// @brief Schedule a set of canonicalization passes to prepare for Polly > /// > /// The set of optimization passes was partially taken/copied from the > /// set of default optimization passes in LLVM. It is used to bring the code > ///
2011 May 03
0
[LLVMdev] Greedy register allocation
Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk> writes: > +10.0% SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/huffbench > +12.0% SingleSource/Benchmarks/McGill/chomp > +18.0% SingleSource/Benchmarks/BenchmarkGame/n-body > +45.5% SingleSource/Benchmarks/BenchmarkGame/puzzle > +10.0% SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/heapsort > +10.5%
2013 Sep 09
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: > > At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >> the case, the numbers are very good. Otherwise, 30% overhead seems still >> to be a little bit much. > I think
2013 Jun 05
0
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:51:31PM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 05/31/2013 01:09 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:59:52AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>> On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>>> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>>>> Jack Howarth wrote: >>>>>>>
2013 Apr 17
1
[LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> > To: "Sebastian Pop" <spop at codeaurora.org> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:45:26 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering > > On 04/17/2013 05:53 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > Hi, > > > > polly is run very
2013 Jun 05
2
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 08:47:03AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:51:31PM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: > > On 05/31/2013 01:09 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:59:52AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: > >>> On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > >>>> Sebastian Pop wrote: > >>>>>
2013 Jun 06
0
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On 06/05/2013 06:24 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 08:47:03AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:51:31PM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>> On 05/31/2013 01:09 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:59:52AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>>>> On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
2013 Jun 05
2
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On 05/31/2013 01:09 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:59:52AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: >>> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>>> Jack Howarth wrote: >>>>>> The attached patch eliminates http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15817 by removing the
2013 May 31
4
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
The attached patch eliminates http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15817 by removing the remaining "; XFAIL:*" added in http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130415/171812.html. The Isl/CodeGen/scevcodegen-1.ll testcase in polly appears as an XPASS in current llvm/polly 3.3 and trunk svn for both x86_64-apple-darwin* and x86_64 Fedora 15 when built against isl
2013 Apr 17
0
[LLVMdev] [polly] pass ordering
On 04/17/2013 08:37 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 04/17/2013 05:53 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> polly is run very early and schedules the following passes before it runs: >>> >>> /// @brief Schedule a set of canonicalization passes to prepare for Polly >>> /// >>> /// The set of
2013 May 31
0
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:59:52AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: >> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>>> Jack Howarth wrote: >>>>> The attached patch eliminates http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15817 by removing the remaining >>>>> "; XFAIL:*" added in
2013 May 31
2
[LLVMdev] [POLLY] fix Bug 15817
On 05/31/2013 10:11 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > Sebastian Pop wrote: >> Sebastian Pop wrote: >>> Jack Howarth wrote: >>>> The attached patch eliminates http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15817 by removing the remaining >>>> "; XFAIL:*" added in http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130415/171812.html. >>>>