similar to: [LLVMdev] Loop localize global variables

Hi Sundeep, I am also interested in the load-store lifting transformation. For static globals as-in your example, the transformation in general would rely on a better static global aliasing information that is currently in review http://reviews.llvm.org/D10059 For non-static globals, one problem with loop-based analysis alone is that in a popular embedded benchmark suite, you get serious gains

Hi All, I noticed LLVM target independent side is converting an ordered less than "setolt" into unordered greater than "setuge" operation. There are no target hooks to control going from the ordered mode into unordered. I am trying to figure out the best way to support unordered operation on Hexagon. We don't have a single instruction to do unordered operation. So we

> > 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. > When I > > run llvm/test *without* my changes on x86, I see 3 failures. Is it > expected? > > I was expecting svn tip on x86 to be clean. Is there a nightly > regression > > result available somewhere that I can check for broken tests. Here is > the > > report from my log: > >

Hello LLVM, Does the community have bots or humans tracking code size for -Os builds? I've noticed troubling regressions lately. Sometime near Nov 5, the EEMBC bitmnp01 benchmark grew by 25% for ARMv7m and 35% for i586. That's ghastly. This week, the EEMBC matrix01 workload grew by 5% for ARMv7m and 3% for i586. Regards, -steve

On Jul 28, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Sundeep wrote: >>> 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. >> When I >>> run llvm/test *without* my changes on x86, I see 3 failures. Is it >> expected? >>> I was expecting svn tip on x86 to be clean. Is there a nightly >> regression >>> result available somewhere that I can check for

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 19 November 2015 at 19:08, Steve King via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Does the community have bots or humans tracking code size for -Os >> builds? > > Hi Steve, > > I still haven't got around doing a CI for EEMBC or SPEC on ARM. I do > track

Eric Christopher <echristo <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > The big pain issues I see merging from ARM64 to AArch64 are: > > 1. Apple have created a fairly complete scheduling model already for > > ARM64, and we'd have to merge the partial? model in AArch64 and theirs. We > > risk regressing performance on Apple's targets here, and we can't

Hi all, I am analyzing auto inc/dec optimization on ARM. On some loops, I noticed aggressive post increment is resulting in poor code due to increased register pressure. I was wondering if there is a way to estimate register pressure during DAG Combiner. I am trying to come up with some heuristic based on # of DAG nodes, # of live ins and live outs, # of machine registers etc. Any suggestions?

Hi All, I am working on a bug in clang. I already have a fix for it and I am going through the "LLVM Testing Infrastructure Guide" to make sure I haven't broken anything else. I have few questions regarding the test suite infrastructure that I hope someone can answer. 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. When I run llvm/test *without* my changes on

On Jun 27, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 26, 2015, at 11:07 PM, Sundeep Mediratta <smedius at gmail.com> wrote: > >> 0.000233 upsdrv_initups(): Power Sources blob: >> <CFArray 0x7ffd18605480 [0x7fff7443bed0]>{type = immutable, count = 1, values = ( >> 0 : <CFBasicHash 0x7ffd18605360 [0x7fff7443bed0]>{type

Maybe adjust this to be different for –Os, -Oz than for –O2? Kevin Smith From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of James Molloy via llvm-dev Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 4:05 PM To: Steve King <steve at metrokings.com>; Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Recent -Os code

> On Jun 26, 2015, at 9:25 PM, Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Sundeep Mediratta <smedius at gmail.com> wrote: > >> OSX Yosemite 10.10.3 >> Nut version 2.6.5 >> Installed via Macports >> Device is Cyberpower CP1000AVRLCD >> Device is visible and is monitored in the OSX control panel >>

Hi folks, As Tim pointed out, we recently had the opportunity to collect 64-bit benchmark performance data for GCC 4.9, AArch64 and ARM64 compilers on a real hardware. It is a cortex-a53 device. Due to proprietary reasons we cannot share the full hardware configuration. The preliminary results were shared at the hackers lab at EuroLLVM yesterday. For those who could not make it, below is

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chris Lattner" <clattner at apple.com> > To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Justin Bogner" > <mail at justinbogner.com>, "Duncan Exon Smith"

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Stephen McGruer <stephen.mcgruer at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm having trouble getting my backend to properly treat the situation where > a char* is converted into a struct, i.e. something like: > > char* pointer_representation = ...; > MyStruct* my_struct = (MyStruct*) pointer_representation; > my_struct->an_int_field = 5; > >

On 24/08/15 10:49, Sundeep Singh Nanuwa wrote: > Hi, > > Is there any issues using spaces in directories paths? > > On 21/08/15 11:06, Sunny wrote: >> Hi, >> >> We have the following shares listed in smb.conf >> >> users cannot access the samba share directly i.e. >> >> \\sambaserver\rixilr >> or >> \\sambaserver\bridges >>

Hi all, Firstly thanks so much to Apple for open sourcing this and Tim for going through the effort of committing it! Along with Bradley I've been looking at this today from a perspective of working out how best to get this merge completed. The one sentence summary is "I think we should use ARM64 as a base". My view on the backends is that the ARM64 backend is more performant but

OSX Yosemite 10.10.3 Nut version 2.6.5 Installed via Macports Device is Cyberpower CP1000AVRLCD Device is visible and is monitored in the OSX control panel Error- macosx-ups -DD -a cyberpower Network UPS Tools - Mac OS X UPS meta-driver 1.0 (2.6.5-Unversioned directory) Warning: This is an experimental driver. Some features may not function correctly. 0.000000 debug level is '2'

I'm having trouble getting my backend to properly treat the situation where a char* is converted into a struct, i.e. something like: char* pointer_representation = ...; MyStruct* my_struct = (MyStruct*) pointer_representation; my_struct->an_int_field = 5; When this occurs, LLVM seems to fold the struct and char* into one assembly 'object', which is perfectly fine. However, it also

HI James, Thanks for your reply and hints on what can be done for the Aarch64 backend optimization for llvm We have SPEC license and v8 hardware. So I will start looking into it warm regards Manjunath On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 8:42 PM, James Molloy <james.molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Manjunath, > > At the time of writing that status we had only done our initial analysis. >