similar to: RISC-V LLVM sync-up call 12 November 2020

For background on these calls, see <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135087.html>. Reminder: the purpose is to co-ordinate between active contributors. If you have support questions etc then it's best to post to llvm-dev. We have a call each Thursday at 4pm GMT, via <https://meet.google.com/ske-zcog-spp>. I've created a shared calendar which may help

If I’m following correctly, there are two size-limited areas. One area, limited to 2GB, is the “text” area. This contains all the code. Then there’s a “global” area, limited to 4GB, which is pointed to by the global pointer. This contains the GOT, plus a flexible area that the object file can stick small bits of data into. And then outside of both of those, additional data is unlimited. It

For background on these calls, see <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135087.html>. Reminder: the purpose is to co-ordinate between active contributors. If you have support questions etc then it's best to post to llvm-dev. We have a call every alternate Thursday at 4pm BST, via <https://meet.google.com/ske-zcog-spp>. We have created a shared calendar which

Hi, Sam. I think that it's a fair comparison. Keep in mind that the GP is only used to reach global variables of local scope and the GOT, where the address of global variables of global scope reside. This model assumes that the distance between the GP and the global data area, GOT and local scope variables is defined at link time. __ Evandro Menezes ◊ SiFive ◊ Austin, TX > On Mar

Oh, I wasn’t really thinking about devices without an MMU where the addresses are physically separated. Makes sense. This reminds me of rwpi on ARM; it has a sort of similar scheme of referring to data indirectly through a pointer, but it also changes the ABI to keep the pointer in a reserved register. -Eli From: Evandro Menezes <evandro.menezes at sifive.com> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2020

LLVM Weekly - #358, November 9th 2020 ===================================== If you prefer, you can read a HTML version of this email at <http://llvmweekly.org/issue/358>. Welcome to the three hundred and fifty-eighth issue of LLVM Weekly, a weekly newsletter (published every Monday) covering developments in LLVM, Clang, and related projects. LLVM Weekly is brought to you by [Alex

# Overview and background RISC-V is a free and open instruction set architecture. It is a modular specification, with a range of standard extensions (e.g. floating point, atomics, etc). New standard extensions are developed through RISC-V Foundation working groups. The specifications for such extensions (e.g. vector and bit manipulation) are publicly available, but are still in flux and won't

<div> </div><div><div><p>Carry-less multiplication[1] instructions exist (at least optionally) on many architectures: armv8, RISC-V, x86_64, POWER, SPARC, C64x, and possibly more.</p><p>This proposal is to add a <code>llvm.clmul</code> instruction. Or if that is contentious, <code>llvm.experimental.bitmanip.clmul</code> instruction.

> ... math errno ... I wouldn't recommend to anyone that they should rely on math errno (because I don't trust libraries to correctly support it). My goal here was to incorporate our existing support for it into the rest of what I'm trying to document. My understanding is that for clang this primarily controls whether or not we feel free to substitute intrinsics for recognized

Good evening, I configured the ups written in the title on home assistant with the driver "nutdrv_qx -a UPS_SKE" witch is the only compatible of the list on the website, I'm only getting 11 entity, am I doing something wrong or is there a more specific driver I can use? Thanks D. Image attached -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 05.07.20 12:21, Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 12:18 PM Shawn Landden via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Carry-less multiplication[1] instructions exist (at least optionally) on many architectures: armv8, RISC-V, x86_64, POWER, SPARC, C64x, and possibly more. >> >> This proposal is to add a

Hello, I'm running mixed models in GAMM4 with 2 (non-nested) random intercepts and I want to include a spline term for one of my exposure variables. However, when I include a spline term, I always get reported degrees of freedom of less than 1, even when I know that my spline is using more than 1 degree of freedom. For example, here is the code for my model: >

I believe the integration is presented as a container on the HA server, so there should be a way to log into it and edit `/etc/nut/ups.conf` or similar during the experiments (generated from YAML settings made in HA GUI somewhere). I have not used it directly, so I can't really help more here. Jim On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 5:47?PM Daniele Lamaddalena <dlamaddalena at gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, Not really sure. Have not heard about such a brand/model on one hand, and the Home Assistant NUT plugin may be (or not be) limiting the selection of data points it shows from NUT on the other. Can you query the readings with NUT `upsc` client? Also, `nutdrv_qx` is an umbrella driver for many different dialects of "Megatec Q<x>" protocol family. Check the

05.07.2020, 05:22, "Roman Lebedev" <lebedev.ri at gmail.com>: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 12:18 PM Shawn Landden via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>  Carry-less multiplication[1] instructions exist (at least optionally) on many architectures: armv8, RISC-V, x86_64, POWER, SPARC, C64x, and possibly more. >> >>  This proposal is to add a

There will be a RISC-V focused Birds of a Feather (BoF) session at the LLVM Dev Meeting in a few weeks time <https://2017llvmdevmtg.sched.com/event/CMiv/co-ordinating-risc-v-development-in-llvm> (Wednesday, October 18, 4:20pm - 5:05pm) The aim of this session is to bring together everyone with an interest in RISC-V support LLVM, and especially those from companies who have had private

Hi all, I'm trying to put together a set of rules for how the various floating point semantic modes should be handled in clang. A lot of this information will be relevant to other front ends, but the details are necessarily bound to a front end implementation so I'm framing the discussion here in terms of clang. Other front ends can choose to follow clang or not. The existence of this set

Hi all, I'm currently working on the implementation for LLVM of the RISCV Bit Manipulation ISA extension described by Clifford Wolf in the following presentation: https://content.riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/17.10-b_wolf.pdf and the following document: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/blob/master/bitmanip-0.90.pdf The aim is to provide the intrinsic functions to the user in

I made the switch to llvm3.3, and encountered a flt_rounds I'm using a soft float architecture and hopefully people have some ideas on how to help: I received: i32 = flt_rounds "Do not know how to promote this operator!" I currently do not have any custom setting for the FLT_ROUNDS_ I'd like to just replace the FLT_ROUNDS_ with a "1" value. Any thoughts on how

On 21 March 2018 at 20:07, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > On 23 November 2017 at 09:38, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: >> On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: >>> Dear list, >>> >>> At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working >>> session the day after,