similar to: Question Regarding SystemZ Implementation Missing Instructions

Hello, Ruby on Rails still, as I think, very poor with MS Windows. I make the comparison as a PHP user. In some minutes, I have got Apache running PHP easily. In Ruby On Rails, there is no such breeze. I expect in the future, Ruby on Rails is going to offer something like php4apache.dll to make life easier. As I think, There are three things made PHP popular: 1st, The ease of installation 2nd,

Hello, I would like to do a partial least square discriminant analysis (PLSDA) in R using the package "ropls" Which is in R available via the R command : source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R") I try to do a PLSDA to illustrate the impact of two genders (AP,C) on 5 compounds measured in persons (samples) should be illustrated. When I try to do a PLSDA I get the warning

Hello > I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU > binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux).  I get errors when > assembling instructions with literals that are negatives.  For example, > the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors: There are different instruction sets for z/System. Basically, you have to provide proper -march

Hi Anton, On 01/30/2011 12:44 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello > >> I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU >> binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux). I get errors when >> assembling instructions with literals that are negatives. For example, >> the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors: >

> I'd still like to know if anyone has sucessfully assembled SystemZ generated > assembly language with a binutils assembler, and if so, how. Almost all testsuite passed ~ 1.5 years ago (with clang + gas). I doubt anyone tried to assembler anything else after that time. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

On 01/30/2011 02:09 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> I'd still like to know if anyone has sucessfully assembled SystemZ generated >> assembly language with a binutils assembler, and if so, how. > Almost all testsuite passed ~ 1.5 years ago (with clang + gas). I > doubt anyone tried to assembler anything else after that time. > Lots of things have changed in 1.5 years with

> I'd like to propose the addition of a new SystemZ backend to the LLVM and > Clang code base. We're interested in this for the same reason we've been > interested in the PowerPC back-end recently: to enable packages in upcoming > enterprise Linux distributions that need LLVM support (e.g. 3D desktop > support via llvmpipe). Cool! > - focus on feature completeness

Hello, this set of patches adds platform-specific support to the base LLVM test suite. The first patch adds 290 new SystemZ CodeGen (.ll) tests. The second patch adds 582 new SystemZ MC assembler (.s) tests. The third patch adds the usual test suite config changes for a platform that supports MCJIT, but not the old JIT, modeled after existing changes for PPC64 and AARCH64. Overall, this test of

İsmail Dönmez <ismail at donmez.ws> writes: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Richard Sandiford < > rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> İsmail Dönmez <ismail at donmez.ws> writes: >> > Using openSUSE 13.1 on s390x machine I get two new regressions with llvm >> > 3.4rc1: >> >> Hmm, I don't see this locally. Just to rule out one

Richard Sandiford wrote: >I'd like to step down as code owner for the SystemZ port and nominate >Ulrich Weigand to take over. Sorry for not doing this sooner. I'd be happy to take over that role. Thanks for all your work on SystemZ, Richard! Bye, Ulrich

Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote on 23.03.2015 19:42:06: > > >Attached are draft patches that do this for X86. Similar but smaller > > >cleanups can also be done for SystemZ and PowerPC if it’s agreed > > >this is a good idea. > > > > However, this was then never implemented for SystemZ and PowerPC. > > Should we do so as well? > >

Hello, this set of patches adds Clang support for SystemZ. The first patch adds a new common code feature that allows platform code to request minimum alignment of global symbols. The background for this is that on System Z, the most efficient way to load addresses of global symbol is the LOAD ADDRESS RELATIVE LONG (LARL) instruction. This instruction provides PC-relative addressing, but only

Hi, Attached is a patch I'm testing. It changes how "MachineFrameInfo::HasCalls" is calculated. Basically, the way it's calculated now is in PEI. And it only looks for frame adjustments (or inline ASM) to determine if the function has a call or not. This way is much more accurate and occurs much sooner. But it breaks this test:

What assembler are people using with the SystemZ backend? I am trying to assemble the output of the SystemZ backend with the GNU binutils assembler (build with --target=s390x-linux). I get errors when assembling instructions with literals that are negatives. For example, the test case test/CodeGen/SystemZ/01-RetImm.ll gives errors: $ s390x-as 01-RetImm.s 01-RetImm.s: Assembler messages:

İsmail Dönmez <ismail at donmez.ws> writes: > Using openSUSE 13.1 on s390x machine I get two new regressions with llvm > 3.4rc1: Hmm, I don't see this locally. Just to rule out one possibility, which compiler are you using to build? Do you see the same thing with a -O0 build? Thanks, Richard > [ 1412s] >

Hi, On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Richard Sandiford < rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > İsmail Dönmez <ismail at donmez.ws> writes: > > Using openSUSE 13.1 on s390x machine I get two new regressions with llvm > > 3.4rc1: > > Hmm, I don't see this locally. Just to rule out one possibility, > which compiler are you using to build? Do you see the

Hello, this set of patches adds SystemZ support to base LLVM. This is split up into three patches just to simplify review; they should be committed as a single change if approved. The first patch adds SystemZ support to the configure logic and support for the systemz Triple. This ought to be straightfoward. The second patch adds changes to LLVM common code required to support the SystemZ ELF

Hello, I'd like to propose the addition of a new SystemZ backend to the LLVM and Clang code base. We're interested in this for the same reason we've been interested in the PowerPC back-end recently: to enable packages in upcoming enterprise Linux distributions that need LLVM support (e.g. 3D desktop support via llvmpipe). Now, I understand that a SystemZ backend used to be part of

Hi Hal, I only just noticed that about a year ago, Jim removed CPU auto-detection for the X86 target: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-April/071991.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140407/212676.html >Currently the X86 backend does CPU auto-detection and subtarget feature >detection when the TargetMachine is created if no explicit CPU was

Hi, Using openSUSE 13.1 on s390x machine I get two new regressions with llvm 3.4rc1: [ 1412s] /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/llvm/unittests/ADT/BitVectorTest.cpp:39: Failure [ 1412s] Value of: Vec.count() [ 1412s] Actual: 1 [ 1412s] Expected: 5U [ 1412s] Which is: 5 [ 1412s] /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/llvm/unittests/ADT/BitVectorTest.cpp:42: Failure [ 1412s] Value of: Vec.all() [ 1412s]