similar to: [LLVMdev] broken LLVM-MC?

Well, you’ll probably need to specify which CPU for the instructions to be recognized as valid encodings. -mcpu=knl doesn’t seem sufficient, though, so there’s probably something more going on. Elena, do you know what’s happening here? It’s important that the disassembler work with the new instructions as well as the assembler. I looked but didn’t see any disassembler tests for avx512. -Jim On

Thank You, It means vmovdqa64 zmm22, zmmword ptr [rip + .LCPI0_0] # zmm22 = [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15] zmm22 will contain 64 bit constant values which are indexes here zmm22=8, 9, 10, 11, 12,13,14,15. not the values loaded from these locations. and zmm2 contains constant 4000. so, vpmuludq zmm14, zmm10, zmm2 ; will multiply the indexes values with 4000, as for array b the stride is 4000. zmm14=

Adding Support For Vectorcall Calling Convention ===================================================== Vectorcall Calling Convention for x64 ---------------------------------------------------- The __vectorcall calling convention specifies that arguments to functions are to be passed in registers, when possible. __vectorcall uses more registers for arguments than __fastcall or the default x64

quite some speed improvement indeed. attached the updated patch to apply to svn/trunk. j -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: theora-mmx.patch.gz Type: application/x-gzip Size: 8648 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora-dev/attachments/20040824/5a5f2731/theora-mmx.patch-0001.bin

Hi Jeremy, all, Sorry this took so long, spent last week in Japan at OSDL conf then netconf. After several false starts, I ended up with a very simple implementation, which clashes significantly with your work since then 8(. I've pushed the patches anyway, but it's going to be significant work for me to re-merge them, so I wanted your feedback first. The first patch simply changes

Hi Jeremy, all, Sorry this took so long, spent last week in Japan at OSDL conf then netconf. After several false starts, I ended up with a very simple implementation, which clashes significantly with your work since then 8(. I've pushed the patches anyway, but it's going to be significant work for me to re-merge them, so I wanted your feedback first. The first patch simply changes

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:16:26 +0100 Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote: > Paravirt breaks CONFIG_X86_PAE=y compilation: > > <-- snip --> > > ... > CC init/main.o > In file included from include2/asm/pgtable.h:245, > from > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2/include/linux/mm.h:40, > from >

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:16:26 +0100 Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote: > Paravirt breaks CONFIG_X86_PAE=y compilation: > > <-- snip --> > > ... > CC init/main.o > In file included from include2/asm/pgtable.h:245, > from > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2/include/linux/mm.h:40, > from >

i386 allmodconfig arch/i386/power/cpu.c: In function '__save_processor_state': arch/i386/power/cpu.c:29: warning: passing argument 1 of 'paravirt_ops.store_gdt' from incompatible pointer type arch/i386/power/cpu.c:30: warning: passing argument 1 of 'paravirt_ops.store_idt' from incompatible pointer type arch/i386/power/cpu.c: In function

i386 allmodconfig arch/i386/power/cpu.c: In function '__save_processor_state': arch/i386/power/cpu.c:29: warning: passing argument 1 of 'paravirt_ops.store_gdt' from incompatible pointer type arch/i386/power/cpu.c:30: warning: passing argument 1 of 'paravirt_ops.store_idt' from incompatible pointer type arch/i386/power/cpu.c: In function

SYSLINUX 3.11-pre5 is hereby a bug fix release candidate. If I don't receive any problem reports, I will release it as-is on Tuesday, August 30. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/boot/syslinux/Testing/ -hpa

Hello, Here is my first speedup patch. Like 10-11%. No IDCT yet. Please feel free to comment my code or even better think about improvements. :) I belive my routines are not so bad, maybe one day they will be even more faster. What needs to be optimized is the loop filter fuction. I have no ideas now how to do it. It does not leave much space for parallel stuff, copying memory from lot of

Fix paravirt_probe() macro so that handing it start_kernel doesn't evoke a warning (start_kernel is asmlinkage). Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/dontdiff --minimal linux-2.6.19-rc4-mm2/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h working-2.6.19-rc4-mm2-warnings/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h ---

Fix paravirt_probe() macro so that handing it start_kernel doesn't evoke a warning (start_kernel is asmlinkage). Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/dontdiff --minimal linux-2.6.19-rc4-mm2/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h working-2.6.19-rc4-mm2-warnings/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h ---

Hi all, Lguest is a simple hypervisor which runs Linux under Linux, without needing VT hardware. Two people asked if I had a version of lguest which worked on other-than-bleeding-edge-mm kernels, so I did a backport of the latest version to 2.6.21. http://lguest.ozlabs.org/lguest-2.6.21-254.patch.gz See Documentation/lguest/lguest.txt for how to run, drivers/lguest/README for the draft code

Hi all, Lguest is a simple hypervisor which runs Linux under Linux, without needing VT hardware. Two people asked if I had a version of lguest which worked on other-than-bleeding-edge-mm kernels, so I did a backport of the latest version to 2.6.21. http://lguest.ozlabs.org/lguest-2.6.21-254.patch.gz See Documentation/lguest/lguest.txt for how to run, drivers/lguest/README for the draft code

Okay, now, before 3.10 is finalized... what bug reports am I still forgetting? -hpa

On Monday 18 June 2007 19:02, Christopher Lamb wrote: > Take a look at getPhysicalRegisterRegClass( > const MRegisterInfo *MRI, > MVT::ValueType VT, > unsigned reg) > > in ScheduleDAG.cpp. Yuck. I was afraid of that. What is the ValueType needed for? Isn't the register id itself an indication of the ValueType it represents? Where I'm at I

Hello, suppose I have a multivariate multiple regression model such as the following: > DF<-data.frame(x1=rep(c(0,1),each=50),x2=rep(c(0,1),50)) > tmp<-rnorm(100) > DF$y1<-tmp+DF$x1*.5+DF$x2*.3+rnorm(100,0,.5) > DF$y2<-tmp+DF$x1*.5+DF$x2*.7+rnorm(100,0,.5) > x.mlm<-lm(cbind(y1,y2)~x1+x2,data=DF) > coef(x.mlm) y1 y2 (Intercept)

Full_Name: Renaud Lancelot Version: Version 2.3.0 (2006-04-24) OS: MS Windows XP Pro SP2 Submission from: (NULL) (82.239.219.108) I think there is a bug in predict.lme, when a polynomial generated by poly() is used as an explanatory variable, and a new data.frame is used for predictions. I guess this is related to * not * using, for predictions, the coefs used in constructing the orthogonal