similar to: [GSoC 2016] Better Alias Analysis By Default - Mid Term Summary

Dear Duncan, Many thanks! Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 16:17, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: > On 01/11/2017 8:11 AM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > after compiling R-3.4.2 on opensuse leap 42.3, make check failed. Until > > R-3.4.1 I never had a problem with these tests. No, the programm stops > > at the following line of tests/reg-tests-1d.R: > > >

Hi all, after compiling R-3.4.2 on opensuse leap 42.3, make check failed. Until R-3.4.1 I never had a problem with these tests. No, the programm stops at the following line of tests/reg-tests-1d.R: > ## available.packages() (not) caching in case of errors > tools::assertWarning(ap1 <- available.packages(repos = "http://foo.bar")) > tools::assertWarning(ap2 <-

Hi, So the Variable Argument Handling Intrinsics section of the LangRef (http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#variable-argument-handling-intrinsics) lists an example that segfaults. Try the following on x86_64: -- 8< -- define i32 @test(i32 %X, ...) { ; Initialize variable argument processing %ap = alloca i8* %ap2 = bitcast i8** %ap to i8* call void @llvm.va_start(i8* %ap2) ; Read a

On 01/11/2017 8:11 AM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > Hi all, > > after compiling R-3.4.2 on opensuse leap 42.3, make check failed. Until > R-3.4.1 I never had a problem with these tests. No, the programm stops > at the following line of tests/reg-tests-1d.R: > >> ## available.packages() (not) caching in case of errors >> tools::assertWarning(ap1 <-

On 01/11/2017 12:02 PM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > Dear Duncan, > > Many thanks! > > Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 16:17, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: >> On 01/11/2017 8:11 AM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> after compiling R-3.4.2 on opensuse leap 42.3, make check failed. Until >>> R-3.4.1 I never had a problem with these tests. No,

Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 17:40, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: > On 01/11/2017 12:02 PM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > > Dear Duncan, > > > > Many thanks! > > > > Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 16:17, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: > >> On 01/11/2017 8:11 AM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> after compiling R-3.4.2 on

On 01/11/2017 1:08 PM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: > Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 17:40, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: >> On 01/11/2017 12:02 PM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: >>> Dear Duncan, >>> >>> Many thanks! >>> >>> Am Mi, 1. Nov 2017, um 16:17, schrieb Duncan Murdoch: >>>> On 01/11/2017 8:11 AM, Albrecht Kauffmann wrote: >>>>>

Hello I have a data set that looks like this; > b2 dato chr status PRRSvac PRRSsanVac PRRSsanDk PRRSdk 33 2007-12-03 090432 R?d SPF 34 2007-02-09 090432 R?d SPF+sanDK 35 2002-12-17 090432 R?d SPF+DK 36 2002-11-27 090432 R?d SPF+sanDK 37 2002-07-23

Hi, I'm new at this, I'm very confused, and I think I'm missing something important here. In our pet example we have this: > fm <- lme(Orthodont) > plot(Orthodont) > plot(augPred(fm, level = 0:1)) which gives us a trellis plot with the females above the males, starting with "F03", "F04", "F11", "F06", etc. I thought the point of

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

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

Hello everyone, If you've read through my previous introduction email (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/099573.html), you can safely ignore this message. The short story is: CFL-AA does not seem to be broken anymore. Please try it out and help us find more bugs / performance issues if switching to it in the future sounds interesting to you. Here are more backgrounds: I

Yes. I've attached an updated patch that does the following: 1. Fixes the partialalias of globals/arguments 2. Enables partialalias for cases where nothing has been unified to a global/argument 3. Fixes that select was unifying the condition to the other pieces (the condition does not need to be processed :P). This was causing unnecessary aliasing. 4. Adds a regression test to

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

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: -

(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,

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

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

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"

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