similar to: Testing CFL alias analysis

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "Testing CFL alias analysis"

2016 May 19
1
Testing CFL alias analysis
Hi Geoff, Thank you so much for the effort! It's good to hear that cfl-aa didn't break anything. However, the fact that it doesn't quite affect code generation is also concerning. I'll definitely look into the issue. On 05/19/2016 02:03 PM, Geoff Berry wrote: > Hi Jia, > > We did some testing with CFL-AA enabled on an aarch64 OoO target on the > llvm test-suite and
2014 Sep 03
2
[LLVMdev] Testing the new CFL alias analysis
Hello everyone, One of Google's summer interns, George Burgess IV, created an implementation of the CFL pointer-aliasing analysis algorithm, and this has now been added to LLVM trunk. Now we should determine whether it is worthwhile adding this to the default optimization pipeline. For ease of testing, I've added the command line option -use-cfl-aa which will cause the CFL analysis to be
2014 Sep 14
2
[LLVMdev] Testing the new CFL alias analysis
In lto+pgo some (5 out of 12 with usual suspect like perlbench and gcc among them using -flto -Wl,-mllvm,-use-cfl-aa -Wl,-mllvm,-use-cfl-aa-in-codegen) the CINT2006 benchmarks don’t compile. Has the implementation been tested with lto? If not, please stress the implementation more. Do we know reasons for gains? Where did you expect the biggest gains? Some of the losses will likely boil down to
2016 May 12
2
[GSoC 2016] Introduction & Feedback - Better Alias Analysis
(Just to note: the other issue i remember with CFL-AA is that it currently causes performance loss. This is quite common when you increase precision, because things move/change things they couldn't before, and often do so without the natural bounds imprecision provided before :P) On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:29 AM, James Molloy via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Yep,
2016 May 11
2
[GSoC 2016] Introduction & Feedback - Better Alias Analysis
Dear LLVM community, I am a GSoC student this year working on the project of improving alias analysis in LLVM. The proposal initially came from a discussion I had with various devs on the mailing list some time ago [1]. The general goal of this project is to make alias analysis (in particular, cfl-aa) "better", and to be more concrete here is a list of objectives I had in mind: -
2014 Sep 15
2
[LLVMdev] Testing the new CFL alias analysis
On CINT2006 ARM64/ref input/lto+pgo I practically measure no performance difference for the 7 benchmarks that compile. This includes bzip2 (although different source base than in CINT2000), mcf, hmmer, sjeng, h364ref, astar, xalancbmk On Sep 15, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gerolf Hoflehner"
2016 Mar 25
1
[GSoC 2016] Proposal: CFL-AA by default
Oops thanks for the reminder. I did use another email address and am terribly sorry for it. Let me just post the link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Kvepb-v5Ta8ug_lLK1kZeexPNlpvj62K5iIF0fMuLyM/edit?usp=sharing On 03/25/2016 11:44 AM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear Jia, > > I don't see your proposal in the system. What is the title of your > proposal, and under what email
2016 May 12
2
[GSoC 2016] Introduction & Feedback - Better Alias Analysis
On 05/11/2016 05:16 PM, George Burgess IV via llvm-dev wrote: > > After applying the patch on r267335 and bootstrap LLVM/clang with > cfl-aa enabled on its own as well as behind basic-aa on an x86 > machine, I ran test-suite with lit and saw no failed test cases > > Woohoo! This is great news. :D Awesome! > > I'm not sure how closely everyone is reading the intro
2014 Sep 16
2
[LLVMdev] Testing the new CFL alias analysis
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerolf Hoflehner" <ghoflehner at apple.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVM Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Jiangning Liu" <liujiangning1 at gmail.com>, "George Burgess IV" > <george.burgess.iv at gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014
2016 Mar 23
2
[GSoC 2016] Proposal: CFL-AA by default
Dear llvm devs, Based on an earlier discussion about existing pointer analyses in LLVM, I quickly hacked up a GSoC proposal on enabling cfl-aa by default. The decision to write it was made two days before the application deadline, hence the writing quality may not be very satisfactory: the background section could be less verbose, and the implementation section could be more formal. Also it
2016 Aug 26
2
[GSoC] Final project report on CFL-AA
Dear LLVM devs, My GSoC project this year is about alias analysis, and I wrote a short article describing what I've done during the summer: https://github.com/grievejia/GSoC2016/raw/master/writeup.pdf In the report you can find an overview of what the current status of CFL-AA. There are also some numbers in the end, but please take those numbers with a grain of salt as they were rather
2016 Mar 25
0
[GSoC 2016] Proposal: CFL-AA by default
Dear Jia, I don't see your proposal in the system. What is the title of your proposal, and under what email address did you submit it? Regards, John Criswell On 3/23/16 4:09 PM, Jia Chen via llvm-dev wrote: > Dear llvm devs, > > Based on an earlier discussion about existing pointer analyses in > LLVM, I quickly hacked up a GSoC proposal on enabling cfl-aa by default. >
2016 Aug 30
2
Fwd: cfl-aa
dear LLVMers, I am trying to use some of the LLVM alias analyses, and I would like to check two things with you: is scev-aa being maintained in LLVM 3.7? Second question: I run cfl-aa, and I got a very small number of pointer disambiguation (no alias) with it. My results for SPEC CINT 2006 follow below. Is this low number of no alias responses something to be excepted? Below the results that I
2016 Jun 21
2
[GSoC 2016] Better Alias Analysis By Default - Mid Term Summary
Dear LLVM Community, This is a brief summary of what I've done so far for CFL-AA, and what I plan to do next. tl;dr: CFL-AA is getting saner. Low-hanging fruits on its improvement have almost been picked up. I can either make CFL-AA more precise (with certain performance cost), or teach other passes to capitalize on CFL-AA better as the next step. Comments and suggestions are more than
2016 Mar 22
0
Existing studies on the benefits of pointer analysis
It's something that I am certainly interested in and qualified to do. However, the way I read Daniel's reply in this thread is: "LLVM, in its current form, is unlikely to benefit from a more precise aa". He did mention that cfl-aa is "more understandable and maintainable", and is "fast enough", but nothing is said about the benefits. There was some
2015 Jan 13
2
[LLVMdev] question about enabling cfl-aa and collecting a57 numbers
Hi folks, Moving the discussion to llvm.dev. None of the changes we talked earlier help. Find attached the C source code that you can use to reproduce the issue. clang --target=aarch64-linux-gnu -c -mcpu=cortex-a57 -Ofast -fno-math-errno test.c -S -o test.s -mllvm -debug-only=licm LICM hoisting to while.body.lr.ph: %21 = load double** %arrayidx8, align 8, !tbaa !5 LICM hoisting to
2016 Mar 22
4
Existing studies on the benefits of pointer analysis
It's found more and more like "get CFL-AA turned on by default" might be a viable GSoC project for the right student. It would require someone with existing knowledge of AA and a willingness to debug nasty problems, but it sounds like there's definitely interest in the community in seeing this happen. If the student finished early (unlikely), they could start on SCEV-AA as
2015 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] question about enabling cfl-aa and collecting a57 numbers
Can you send me actual LLVM IR or a preprocessed source from using -E? I don't have a machine handy that has headers that target that arch. On Tue Jan 13 2015 at 4:33:29 PM Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Anything other than noalias or mustalias should be getting passed down the > stack, so either that is not happening or CFL aa is giving better answers > and
2015 Jan 14
3
[LLVMdev] question about enabling cfl-aa and collecting a57 numbers
On 13 January 2015 at 22:11, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > This is caused by CFLAA returning PartialAlias for a query that BasicAA > can prove is NoAlias. > One of them is wrong. Which one? I'm not sure from your description that this is a chaining issue. PartialAlias doesn't chain and isn't supposed to, it's a final answer just like NoAlias and
2016 Mar 21
6
Existing studies on the benefits of pointer analysis
Hi Daniel, On 03/21/2016 11:05 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Jia Chen via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > Dear llvm devs, > > tl;dr: What prevents llvm from switching to a fancier pointer > analysis? > > > Nothing. > > > Currently,