similar to: [LLVMdev] Predictive Commoning / Scalar Replacement

Yin Ma wrote: > Hello, > > It seems there is the no redundancy elimination over loop iterations, such > > as predictive communing or scalar replacement in LLVM. They are quite > usefully > > for computation code. I am wondering if any party is working or has plan to > > implement those optimizations? I don't know of any, but I was wondering if you could point me

On 12/1/2012 7:10 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > > I don't know of any, but I was wondering if you could point me to the > paper that describes predictive commoning? I could only find the > second-order predictive commoning paper, which if I understand correctly > is a much newer and different algorithm. I think the original paper was some internal IBM publication. The idea is

There is a non-internal techpub for this somewhere, though it escapes me. My recollection is that TPO (the middle end of XLC) had moved on to 2nd order predictive quite a while ago. At least, the implementation I saw 6+ years ago in TPO was much closer to what is described in the 2nd order paper. On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: >

On 12/1/2012 10:38 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > There is a non-internal techpub for this somewhere, though it escapes me. > My recollection is that TPO (the middle end of XLC) had moved on to > 2nd order predictive quite a while ago. > > At least, the implementation I saw 6+ years ago in TPO was much closer > to what is described in the 2nd order paper. TPO never had any other

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 12/1/2012 10:38 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> >> There is a non-internal techpub for this somewhere, though it escapes me. >> My recollection is that TPO (the middle end of XLC) had moved on to >> 2nd order predictive quite a while ago. >> >> At least, the

Hi John, It seems the dereferencing a NULL pointer is undefined behavior but Calling a function through a null pointer seems o.k. If so , for this place, we need comment out the check. http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#232 look at Notes from the October 2003 meeting. Yin From: John Criswell [mailto:criswell at illinois.edu] Sent: Wednesday,

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Yin Ma <yinma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi John, > > > > It seems the dereferencing a NULL pointer is undefined behavior but > > Calling a function through a null pointer seems o.k. > What is the well defined behavior of calling a null function pointer? > > > If so , for this place, we need comment out the check. >

Hi Andy, Actually, if we just add hooks that preserves the existing behavior, It is not difficult. For example, For case one, we can define one function like virtual const SCEV* getTargetPreferredWinnerReg(const SCEV*& ScaledReg, SmallVector<const SCEV *, 4>& BaseRegs, GlobalValue*& BaseGV) const; In NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs, we can

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yin Ma" <yinma at codeaurora.org> > To: "Andrew Trick" <atrick at apple.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 4:21:50 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Suggestion About Adding Target Dependent Decision in LSR Please > > > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Actually,

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com > wrote: > > > On 1/28/16 4:00 PM, Yin Ma via cfe-dev wrote: > >> Hi David, >> >> I assume you have a powerful machine. Our drive space is on network >> mounted >> >> machined by IT department. The machine is default Ubuntu setup with 8 >> cores. >>

Hi Duncan, Yes, exactly. However, we need define Opcode MIN/MAX Into ISDOpcodes.h. Do you like to add those two definitions Into the tree? Thanks, Yin -----Original Message----- From: Duncan Sands [mailto:duncan.sands at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Duncan Sands Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:10 PM To: Yin Ma Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Any plan to

Hi All, In the target I am working, we comes cross a situation that the loop strength reduction could deliver a better result but currently not, because 1. the algorithm narrows search space by winner registers without considering the target preferred format. (NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs) 2. Cost comparison solely favors the number register without considering other

On Mar 13, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Yin Ma <yinma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi All, > > In the target I am working, we comes cross a situation that the loop strength reduction > could deliver a better result but currently not, because > 1. the algorithm narrows search space by winner registers without considering > the target preferred format.

I've got 4 Cisco 7960's and they're behind a firewall (sonic wall). The asterisk box is on a WAN connection on the other end of a DS3, the phones connect fine to the Asterisk server as you can see from the output of show sip peers below. tp3/tp3 <firewall-ip> D N 255.255.255.255 60665 Unmonitored tp2/tp2 <firewall-ip> D N

Hi all I have created a lattice graph but the text appears too big. Just wondering if there was a way I could change the font size. tp1.nDai=xyplot(value ~ yr | Name, data = nDai,type = 'o') update(tp1.nDai, aspect = c(0.8), layout = c(4, 4)) I would appreciate your help. Kind regards andy Andrew McFadden MVS BVSc Incursion Investigator Investigation & Diagnostic Centres -

Just received the news from Tom Mornini. Congrats Ezra for the new Engine Yard site and the blog you will be collaborating. Hope to read you there soon. http://www.engineyard.com/ Jonathan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/backgroundrb-devel/attachments/20060925/3f251fa4/attachment.html

Hi all, I am a graduate student at Stony Brook University and have joined as an intern in Debugger's group.. I am interested in contributing to llvm in my spare time.I would like to work on Predictive Commoning transformation.I have some experience working on GCC plugins but my major experience has been into Linux Kernel and Architecture in general. With Regards, Abhinav Duggal.

The summary stats for the xin and yin variables below are correct. However, if I use plot(xin,yin), an exception is thrown saying that "object xin is not found." Also, it is apparent that I can't successfully replace the x and y vectors with values from xin and yin. The four plots on one panel are showing but the range of x and y is only [0,1], and therefore, it seems like an

Hi Yin, I second David's words. I use shared libs myself on debug builds, but static builds with gold on a local disk is pretty feasible. Before I used gold, I had to have 16GB of RAM on my laptop, now I need less than 8GB for static builds. On 28 January 2016 at 23:58, Yin Ma via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > It is O.K. I just hope BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON is tested

Hey Guys, I know it's only TP1 and maybe? this isn't the best place to ask but where do I start? I've download the debian experimental Samba 4 TP1 package and installed it. The debian installer did the provisioning and I've set up dns. I set up a share and it all seems to work fine with the built-in administrator account. But what now? how do I join computers to the domaind? Do