similar to: LLVM Start

Yes running LLVM performance test suite with LTO and Thin LTO enabled. Thanks, Siddharth On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > I'm not completely sure what you are asking. Are you looking for > performance benchmarks to use for LTO and ThinLTO testing? Or are you > asking how to build/run with LTO and ThinLTO? Are you asking how to

Hopefully someone else on the dev list who has experience with LNT and the LLVM test-suite will chime in. I've never run it myself. Adding Mehdi since he ran it with LTO/ThinLTO. I found some documentation for the test-suite: https://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#test-suite-overview http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/quickstart.html http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/tests.html#llvm-cmake-test-suite But I

Thanks. I am just trying to find a relocation and linking design for Hexagon architecture, whether to follow the MIPS style of relocation or other architecture style of relocation. Thats my question . Thats why i was asking about the functions and their differences Please guide. Thanks, Siddharth On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:37 PM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: > If

Hi, Thanks for the info, If i only want to run performance test on benchmarks for LTO and Thin LTO enabled target, Can u suggest ways to do it ? I want to do it at my end. Thanks, Siddharth On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > I've only measured performance on x86. There are some old results for SPEC > cpu2006 in the blog post here:

I'm not completely sure what you are asking. Are you looking for performance benchmarks to use for LTO and ThinLTO testing? Or are you asking how to build/run with LTO and ThinLTO? Are you asking how to run LLVM's performance test-suite with LTO and ThinLTO? Teresa On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:21 AM Siddharth Shankar Swain < h2015096 at pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in> wrote: > Hi, >

Hi Chris, Thanks for the suggestion i was trying to use the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691 and ASTimporter concept for cross file analysis. Can u explain in details the approach u suggested ? What is `nm` on the object files ? Can u suggest some approach to start on this cross file analysis tool. Thanks, Siddharth On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com>

Hi Chris, Thanks for answering, Can u clarify on this comment mentioned in https://github.com/Z3Prover/z3/issues/861 . cplusplus no exception support · Issue #861 · Z3Prover/z3 · GitHub - LLVM's *source code* does not use exceptions for performance reasons and so is compiled by default with -fno-exceptions. When using LLVM's libraries via it's C++ interface it is important

> On Sep 19, 2017, at 10:09 AM, Siddharth Shankar Swain <h2015096 at pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > Thanks for the suggestion i was trying to use the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D30691> and ASTimporter concept for cross file analysis. Can u explain in details the approach u suggested ? There is a tutorial on

+Aaron because i think he uses scan-build on Windows more or less successfully. I won't have time for setting up a Windows machine for myself in the nearest future. Could you tell us exactly what you're doing and what exactly does it print to console, more in the spirit of http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ? > scan-build: Not supported for windows. Exiting...

yeah so when LTO runs, in the linker, it uses the target to produce object code. In the sense of code generation for target arch. Thanks, Siddharth On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:03 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > Can you be more specific? LTO/ThinLTO are target independent. You just > need to be using a linker that supports *LTO (gold, lld, ld64, eg). > Teresa

Hi Siddharth, alternativly you can try this <https://github.com/rizsotto/scan-build>, it's written in Python. Regards, Laszlo On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 5:14 AM Artem Dergachev via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I never tried it myself but i can try to help you with specific problems > that you're having if you disclose them. > >

LLVM does not allow the use of exceptions in our code. We do not allow throwing or catching them. That does not mean you cannot compile the code with exceptions enabled, it just means we don't use them. Clang is a full C++ compiler. Even though LLVM & Clang do not use exceptions in their implementation, Clang does support compiling C++ code that uses exceptions. Does this answer your

Thanks for reply, it was really helpful. Can u just be more specific and tell about processRelocationRef() and resolveRelocation() in Targets/RuntimeDyld(objectfile format)(arch).h and also in RuntimeDyldELF.cpp and how the same function is implemented in different ways in both the files ? Thanks, Siddharth On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 8:16 PM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote:

We are currently implementing the backends for other solvers (you can follow the progress here: https://github.com/mikhailramalho/clang). So far we got Boolector, MathSAT and Yices ready. CVC4 should be done soon. When used to refute bugs, they all give roughly the same results: a ~5% speedup if there are refuted bugs or a ~5% slowdown if no bug is refuted. I've only tried to analyze one

Thanks for the reply. I was just asking about in general whatever header files are there in Targets/ for different architectures are not including any function except this processRelocationRef() to be used in RuntimeDyldELF.cpp or RuntimeDyldCOFF.cpp or RuntimeDyldMachO.cpp and i think these files are the ones which are actually doing the relocation and linking work. So what purpose do these

I'd be interested in attending and helping organise the Hyderabad meetup. Cheers Siddharth On Wed 30 May, 2018, 14:32 Siddharth Shankar Swain via llvm-dev, < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > We are a group of LLVM compiler developers in Hyderabad area. Considering > few previous mail about meetups in India, we are planning to organize LLVM > meetups

Siddharth, I'm not sure what coding standards you refer to when you say "some C++ coding standard". This question is answered in the LLVM Coding Standards document here: https://www.llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#do-not-use-rtti-or-exceptions <https://www.llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#do-not-use-rtti-or-exceptions> As such LLVM's coding standards prohibit the

Can you be more specific? LTO/ThinLTO are target independent. You just need to be using a linker that supports *LTO (gold, lld, ld64, eg). Teresa On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, Siddharth Shankar Swain via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > Can anyone guide on how to enable LTO and Thin LTO for a new backend > target ? > Thanks, > Siddharth > >

(Apologies for the re-send Siddharth, I failed to cc the list) There is no existing tool that I'm aware of which performs this analysis on the AST. It is possible to do on an AST. You would just need to write an AST Visitor that finds declarations, definitions, and uses of functions. Is there a reason you need to do this at the AST level? With C code this analysis can be trivially performed

Thanks for the detailed explanation. So is changing the analysis technique from path sensitive (symbolic execution) analysis to some other technique bring in the soundness property ? Thanks, Siddharth On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 1:27 AM, Artem Dergachev <noqnoqneo at gmail.com> wrote: > Nope, at least not with the "path-sensitive" (symbolic execution) engine. > Which is the