Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[RFC] Introduce Dump Accumulator"
2020 Aug 05
3
[RFC] Introduce Dump Accumulator
I think that we should think about the relationship between this
proposed mechanism and the existing mechanism that we have for emitting
and capturing optimization remarks. In some sense, I feel like we
already have a lot of this capability (e.g., llc has -remarks-section).
-Hal
On 8/5/20 5:51 PM, Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev wrote:
> I like the ability, not sure about the proposed
2020 Aug 05
3
[RFC] Introduce Dump Accumulator
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:51 PM Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com> wrote:
> I’m not a fan of keeping important data outside the IR in an analysis. If
> we’re planning to emit it, it should be represented directly in the IR. Is
> there some reason we can’t just stick the data in a global variable?
>
The analysis in the scenarios here is external to LLVM - ML training, for
2017 Jul 12
2
[LLD] Adding WebAssembly support to lld
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Sorry for the belated response. I was on vacation last week. A couple of
> thoughts on this patch and the story of webassembly linking.
And I'm about to be on (mostly) vacation for next 3 weeks :)
>
> - This patch adds a wasm support as yet another major architecture besides
>
2012 Jul 24
11
[PATCH 01/12] configure: Add -nographic command line option to qemu.
Without this option, configure will fail when there is no display.
Signed-off-by: Masami HIRATA <msmhrt at gmail.com>
---
configure.ac | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index de8a064..61d6f69 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -593,16 +593,16 @@ working.
AC_MSG_FAILURE([$QEMU version must be >=
2017 Jul 06
3
[LLD] Adding WebAssembly support to lld
Dan Gohman <sunfish at mozilla.com> writes:
>> Sorry, I meant why that didn't work with ELF (or what else didn't).
>>
>
> The standard executable WebAssembly format does not use ELF, for numerous
> reasons, most visibly that ELF is designed for sparse decoding -- headers
> contain offsets to arbitrary points in the file, while WebAssembly's format
> is
2012 Aug 25
1
[PATCH] python: Fixed syntax errors in python/guestfs-py.c
Signed-off-by: Masami HIRATA <msmhrt at gmail.com>
---
generator/generator_python.ml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/generator/generator_python.ml b/generator/generator_python.ml
index dc9cbca..b11df6e 100644
--- a/generator/generator_python.ml
+++ b/generator/generator_python.ml
@@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ free_strings (char **argv)
pr "
2012 Aug 26
1
[PATCH] Mac OS X: Fixed combination of running autogen.sh on Linux and building on Mac OS X
Signed-off-by: Masami HIRATA <msmhrt at gmail.com>
---
generator/generator_xdr.ml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/generator/generator_xdr.ml b/generator/generator_xdr.ml
index 9acea8f..ef9e0f2 100644
--- a/generator/generator_xdr.ml
+++ b/generator/generator_xdr.ml
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ let generate_xdr () =
generate_header CStyle LGPLv2plus;
(* This has to be
2020 Nov 09
5
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have
output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example,
they check debug info. Adding // FIXME: comments shift that.
If the goal is easy identification of auto-inserted -allow-unused-prefixes
directives, how about:
- we make the flag an enum: true, false, and auto_inserted
- we use
2020 Apr 09
2
RFC: a practical mechanism for applying Machine Learning for optimization policies in LLVM
Sorry, I wasn't aware of that.
I can make the google doc view-only, keeping the current comments. I'll
wait a bit (few hrs) to see if there's any pushback to that.
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 9:57 AM Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com>
wrote:
> One suggestion : should we consolidate the discussion into the main
> thread? I know some folks are not willing to comment in
2017 Aug 31
7
[RFC] Function stack size section.
Hi All,
We have a local change in the X86AsmPrinter that outputs a section
containing metadata on function stack sizes. We use this to measure changes
to stack size between versions of the compiler and it also allows our
licensees to do the same for their code.
The section simply contains pairs of function symbol references (8 byte)
and stack sizes (unsigned LEB128).
We would like to
2020 Nov 10
3
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 01:03 James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk>
wrote:
> I don't know if lit's parser is up to this (I suspect it isn't), but could
> you add a comment to the end/in the middle of a RUN? Something like `# RUN:
> do some thing | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=UNUSED --allow-unused-prefixes
> ## FIXME? That would avoid changing the line
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
how about -allow-unused-prefixes=needs_review
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't feel too strongly about the "=true" bit for legitimate cases -
> I'd prefer not to have it, but it's not the end of the world.
> I do feel more strongly that if you're going to automatically add it
> to cases that might
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
My preference would be to go with the tri-value option - I think the
downside of folks needing to write a value after "-allow-unused-prefixes"
is not that terrible; if folks feel that using true/false/auto is weird,
how about "allowed/disallowed/script_allowed" or something like that. I'd
argue that the value here is getting to the place where the default is
right (so we
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have
> output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example,
> they check debug info. Adding
2020 Nov 05
4
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:36 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:46 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at
2020 May 01
2
[EXTERNAL] Re: arc diff says "disk is full"?
Could this issue also be related to an “AphrontQueryException #1030: Got error 28 from storage engine” error when browsing Phabricator?
~ Todd Snider
From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hubert Tong via llvm-dev
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 9:15 AM
To: Mircea Trofin
Cc: Nicolai Hähnle via llvm-dev
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [llvm-dev] arc diff says "disk is
2020 Nov 06
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
I recently discovered that multi-line RUN statements can actually be
interrupted with non-RUN lines, without changing the behaviour. In other
words, you can do something like:
# RUN: some command --option1 \
## Comment
# CHECK: check something
# RUN: --option2
And you'd end up with "some command --option1 --option2" being run. It's
rather surprising behaviour, and not one
2020 Nov 06
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
I think it would make more sense to add it at each individual call site.
This ensures that all cases are fixed, rather than just one in a file. It
also ensures that in the (hopefully unlikely) event that there are both
intentional and unintentional use-cases within a file, each one gets
checked.
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 20:29, Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
2020 Nov 05
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 7:30 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> There are currently 1350 owner-less failures in the spreadsheet
>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o6q3XH1n3DDyyccnYZ_kVfhFbTDzC_S09e973_cwYuw/edit#gid=0>.
2020 Nov 05
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
There are currently 1350 owner-less failures in the spreadsheet
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o6q3XH1n3DDyyccnYZ_kVfhFbTDzC_S09e973_cwYuw/edit#gid=0>.
These seem to be the larger areas there.
If you see an area you have ownership or expertise in, please sign up for
fixing the tests by Monday, Nov. 9.
Otherwise, I will "blanket-add" --allow-unused-prefixes=true to the