similar to: Adding a new External Suite to test-suite

When I load my plugin into opt or llc, I get a bunch of warnings: llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'use-unknown-locations' defined more than once! llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'disable-debug-info-print' defined more than once! llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'print-dbgscope' defined more than once! llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'disable-sched-hazard'

Can you share you compile-time and memory footprint measurements at least for CTMark? For a new pass/feature it would be great to share this with the community before you commit. Or did I miss them? Thanks Gerolf > On Jun 27, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Geoff Berry via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > EarlyCSE w/ MemorySSA has been enabled by default as of r306477 >

Hi Kristof, Thanks for the measurements. > On May 24, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > >> >> On 23 May 2017, at 21:48, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Great! >> I thought I had to look at our pipeline at O0 to make sure optimized regalloc was

Great! I thought I had to look at our pipeline at O0 to make sure optimized regalloc was supported (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022 <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022> in mind). Glad I was wrong, it saves me some time. > On May 22, 2017, at 12:51 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > >> On 22 May 2017, at 09:09, Diana Picus

Hi, One of the most time-consuming passes in LLVM middle-end is InstCombine (see e.g. [1]). It is a very powerful pass capable of doing all the crazy stuff, and new patterns are being constantly introduced there. The problem is that we often use it just as a clean-up pass: it's scheduled 6 times in the current pass pipeline, and each time it's invoked it checks all known patterns. It

Andrzej, On 7/14/19 8:02 AM, Andrzej Warzynski wrote: > This is still very early stages, but you can be my guinea pig: > > https://github.com/banach-space/llvm-tutor > > It's a tutorial that I've been preparing recently and am hoping to > present somewhere at some point :-) I believe that it already covers 1), > 2) and 3). I haven't had the time to work on 4).

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > When I load my plugin into opt or llc, I get a bunch of warnings: > > llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'use-unknown-locations' defined more than > once! > llc: CommandLine Error: Argument 'disable-debug-info-print' defined more > than once! > llc: CommandLine Error: Argument

> On Nov 17, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Gerolf, > > This is really cool! > I’m very excited about this initiative and I hope we’ll be able to get to a stage where compile time regression are handled like other regression: if they are not expected / justified by the commit author promptly, the commit should be reverted in the

Hi, It's been a while since I sent the last compile time report [1], where it was shown that LLVM was getting slower over time. But now I'm happy to bring some good news: finally, LLVM is getting faster, not slower :) *** Current status *** Many areas of LLVM have been examined and improved since then: InstCombine, SCEV, APInt implementation, and that resulted in almost 10% improvement

> On Apr 11, 2017, at 10:25 PM, Madhur Amilkanthwar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I am interested in knowing more. > 1. What benchmarks does LLVM community use for compile-time study? I see CTMark, but is that the only one being analyzed? CTMark is not cast in stone. Its purpose is for the community to have a trackable proxy for the overall llvm test

Hi, this is about kicking-off regular compile-time tracking for LLVM and CLANG on the green dragon: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Compile%20Time/ <http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Compile%20Time/>. The goal is to stay on top of compile-time issues immediately when they occur so they can be assessed rather than creeping in unnoticed. The methodology is simple: form a CTMark suite

On 03/17/2017 04:30 PM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > >> On Mar 17, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Mikhail Zolotukhin via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> One of the most time-consuming passes in LLVM middle-end is >> InstCombine (see e.g. [1]). It is a very powerful pass capable

<speex-dev at xiph.org> Hi all, I'm a begginer with DSP and i need your help and suggestions. I'm trying to use the Speex and a DSP DM642 to implement a solution with voice! I'm using the 1.2 beta 3 distribution and the TI's Code Composer Studio v3.1 simulator. I coosed speex_C64_test.pjt and modified the speex_C64_test.cmd to only use the DM642 external RAM memory. I'm

Hi Johannes, > All the use cases sound reasonable but why do we need these kind of "weird files" to do this? > > I mean, why would you train or measure something on single definition translation units and not on the original ones, potentially one function at a time? I think that's the fundamental question :) The short answer is that it is hard to compile the files from

> On Mar 17, 2017, at 6:12 PM, David Majnemer <david.majnemer at gmail.com> wrote: > > Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of this change as-is. The set of transforms that were added behind ExpensiveChecks seems awfully strange and many would not lead the reader to believe that they are expensive at all (the SimplifyDemandedInstructionBits and foldICmpUsingKnownBits calls being the

Florian, On 7/10/19 2:17 PM, Florian Hahn wrote: > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/~asampson/blog/llvm.html describes how to > create an out-of-source pass (see 'Let’s Write a Pass’). I think it > is for LLVM 3.8 though. Thanks for pointing that out. I had actually recently stumbled across that page (and the GitHub repository it references, https://github.com/sampsyo/llvm-pass-skeleton)

Using Ices2, is it possible to take 2 mono sources that are presented to the soundcard as the left and right channel, and make each of them a seperate mount point? My sources are all low bandwidth mono, and I would love to have a second stream without having to add a second soundcard or a second machine. I looked through the documentation, but I don't recall seeing this specific ability.

> On Mar 17, 2017, at 6:12 PM, David Majnemer via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of this change as-is. The set of transforms that were added behind ExpensiveChecks seems awfully strange and many would not lead the reader to believe that they are expensive at all (the SimplifyDemandedInstructionBits and foldICmpUsingKnownBits calls

Hi, I am trying to make my pass compiling inside the LLVM tree or outside. It works when I include my pass inside the tools folder, however when I try to compile it outside the LLVM tree I get the following error: "add_library cannot create target "LLVMTarget" because an imported target with the same name already exists.” It happens when I’ve already compiled and installed my

> To (hopefully) make it easier to answer this question, I've posted my (work-in-progress) patch which adds a known-bits cache to InstCombine. > I rebased it yesterday, so it should be fairly easy to apply: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31239 - Seeing what this does to the performance of the > benchmarks mentioned in this thread (among others) would certainly be interesting. Thanks! I