similar to: [cfe-dev] [Openmp-dev] LLVM Social in Austin - Nov. 15?

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sebastian Pop" <spop at codeaurora.org> > To: "James H Cownie" <james.h.cownie at intel.com> > Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "John Leidel (jleidel)" <jleidel at micron.com>, "LLVM Dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at

Hi, On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Cownie, James H via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > It would be much more convenient for those of us who are in town for SC and staying downtown if we could find somewhere in walking range. (Which in my mind is 1 to 3/2 of a mile; others may have different criteria, but I find a 30 min walk refreshing after taking beer :-). > Agreed.

Hi everyone, There seems to be a good level of interest in this; so we should settle on a time and location. It has been pointed out that previous socials were held at http://bbrovers.com/ - we seem to have a preference for the availability of alcoholic beverages, and otherwise no strong opinions have been expressed. Logistically, we should pick someplace likely to have flexibility regarding

Hello again, Because the LLVM in HPC workshop will be in Austin on Nov. 15th (http://llvm-hpc2-workshop.github.io/), we'll have an anomalously-high density of LLVM developers in Austin that day. I think it would be a great evening to have an LLVM social! I'm not familair with the Austin area, but I've cc'd some folks who are (or at least were) in Austin, so hopefully we can get

All, in working through the RISCV LLVM backend, I’m running into some trouble in defining the instruction formats for the system instruction. The system instructions follow a pre-defined instruction template (type-I), but differ in that they have no input registers (only the target). The system instructions are defined as: rdcycle Rt I’ve defined a stand-alone instruction definition (as

Hi John, Thank you for the comments. I am addressing some of them bellow. Regards, Samuel 2014-08-11 9:36 GMT-04:00 John Leidel (jleidel) <jleidel at micron.com>: > Sergey [et.al], thanks for putting this proposal together. Overall, this > looks like a pretty solid approach to providing relatively hardware > agnostic omp target functionality. I had several comments/questions

I must not be asking clearly. I have a machine on which I have placed the tarballs - but no internet access. How do I use the *src.tar.gz files from the llvm 3.4 downloads page? I understand the layout produced by the svn actions, but if I have just the tarballs, do I simply replace "svn co" with "tar -xvzf" in the sequence? How do the names of the tarballs map to the names

I am using the source distribution, and the first puzzle is that it doesn't seem to match with the installation instructions from svn. E.g., svn talks about llvm, cfe, compiler-rt, etc; however, the source is in many differently named *.tar.gz files: clang-3.4.src.tar.gz libcxx-3.4.src.tar.gz polly-3.4.src.tar.gz clang-tools-extra-3.4.src.tar.gz lld-3.4.src.tar.gz

Chandler, That raises a more meta-question for me, which is “Why should StreamExecutor be in LLVM at all?” AFAICS, with you approach · It is not a runtime library whose interface the compiler needs to understand. · It does not depend on any LLVM runtime libraries. · It is expected to be used with out-of-tree plugins. If I got all of that right, what connection does it

> I'd support some of Jame's comments if liboffload wasn't glued to OMP as it is now. I certainly have no objection to moving liboffload elsewhere if that makes it more useful to people. There is no real "glue" holding it there; it simply ended up in the OpenMP directory structure because that was an easy place to put it, not because that's the optimal place for it.

We have noticed that although we have active development in the OpenMP runtime, there is no formal code-owner. I would therefore like to nominate Andrey Churbanov who is a major committer and has deep experience with the runtime code since before it was the LLVM runtime. -- Jim James Cownie <james.h.cownie at intel.com> SSG/DPD/TCAR (Technical Computing, Analyzers and Runtimes) Tel: +44

I think it would be great if StreamExecutor could use liboffload to perform its offloading under the hood. Right now offloading is handled in StreamExecutor using platform plugins, so I think it could be very natural for us to write a plugin which basically forwards to liboffload. If that worked out, we could delete our current plugins and depend only on those based on liboffload, and then all the

Jason, It's great that Google are interested in contributing to the development of LLVM in this area, and that you have code to support offload. However, I'm not sure that all of it is needed, since LLVM already has the offload library which has been being developed in the context of OpenMP, but actually provides a general facility. It has been a part of LLVM since April 2014, and is

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:59:52AM +0100, Renato Golin wrote: > Tom, code owner nomination. > > Andrey is the most active developer, so I think it makes sense. How > long do we wait to change the file? Is there any process that you'd > like to follow? > I don't think there is a formal process, but usually the file gets updated once Chris approves. -Tom > cheers,

Hi Jean-Marc, Thanks for your response. Given a worst case scenario, what is the "worst case" latency (in terms of Speex frames) that the jitter buffer algorithm will incur? We're trying to determine the worst case hard number. Sorry for unclear question below; what I was trying to ask is that given a worst case latency (which I'm asking in the first question) inherent in

Dear Sir / Madam I had been using Glusterfs of both nodes, and it is under in distribute mode. But I cannot use all of the gluster commands at one of the node recently, any gluster command not respond (E.g volume info or pool list), and I got the error in cli.log . Does anyone can help me, many thanks. Here is the log error: [cli.c:759:main] 0-cli: Started running gluster with version

Hi there, I am reading the 2004 paper "Smoothing with mixed model software" in Journal of Statistical Software, by Ngo and Wand. I tried to run their first example in Section 2.1 using R but I had some problems. Here is the code: library(nlme) fossil <- read.table("fossil.dat",header=T) x <- fossil$age y <- 100000*fossil$strontium.ratio knots <-

Hi, everyone, The paper submission deadline for this year's LLVM in HPC workshop has been further extended to September 14th (AoE). We're looking for a few additional submissions, so if you have anything that could be submitted as a paper by the beginning of next week, please take advantage of this opportunity. If you have any questions, please let me know. SC20 is now a virtual

Tried your fixed_generic.h change but that didn't help. Andy ----- Original Message ---- From: Andy Ngo <ndno72-speex@yahoo.com> To: Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:13:35 PM Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] 4kbps sounds robotic on TMS320C64 Jean-Marc, Yes, fixed-point is enabled (#define FIXED_POINT in

Chandler: 1) I completely agree with the comments some others have made about us needing to make it clear that this isn't some Intel-only thing, it’s the LLVM OpenMP runtime. Some suggestions that I think would make sense to help here: … code owner discussion elided since Chris has endorsed Andrey… - Clearly updating the readme and such would be appropriate. Certainly, no problem with