Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "Recovery of Speex stream"
2009 Jun 18
2
Asterisk on AVR32
Greetings everyone,
I'm trying to compile asterisk for an AVR32 (Atmel NGW100).
Buildroot for AVR32 already has the asterisk package, though it has
bugs. Firstly it tries to apply a patch for 1.2 on a 1.6, but deleting
the contents of the patch file did the trick.
Now, the problem is making asterisk. The first error is because asterisk
needed to be ./configure:ed.
Trying to just do
2018 Mar 15
2
Commit module to Git after each Pass
Does git-commit-after-all print correctly after all the passes? Maybe I
messed it up and it skip some passes, therefore having less to do?
Either that, or piping has a higher cost than writing to file. Looks like
it surprisingly spends much less time in system more when going through
file. Maybe that's because the file is consistently around the same size
and is mmapped into memory
2018 Mar 15
0
Commit module to Git after each Pass
Hmm...
I tried Alexandre's fix from D44244 and surprisingly it appears that
just using -print-module-scope w/o
any additional git actions is waaaay slower on my testcase than
-git-commit-module-all.
Hell, even a plan -print-after-all is slower:
] time R/bin/opt -O3 some-ir.ll -disable-output -git-commit-after-all
2>/dev/null
real 0m8.041s
user 0m7.133s
sys 0m0.936s
] time
2018 Mar 15
2
Commit module to Git after each Pass
On 03/15/2018 01:32 PM, Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev wrote:
> For this to be really usable in this setup we need additionally to:
> - extend -print-module-scope to cover basic block passes
> - introduce a clear way to separate module IRs as those are being
> printed by -print-after-all
>
> But yes, it should work, and a wrapper that pipes to git fast-import
> seems to be
2018 Mar 15
0
Commit module to Git after each Pass
For this to be really usable in this setup we need additionally to:
- extend -print-module-scope to cover basic block passes
- introduce a clear way to separate module IRs as those are being
printed by -print-after-all
But yes, it should work, and a wrapper that pipes to git fast-import
seems to be the best way to handle it.
regards,
Fedor.
On 03/15/2018 12:31 AM, Daniel Neilson via
2004 Aug 06
2
SPEEX_GET_SAMPLING_RATE of encoder is wrong
Hi,
I'm using speex 1.1.4 and when I query SPEEX_GET_SAMPLING_RATE
as in
speex_encoder_ctl ( m_pEncoderState, SPEEX_GET_SAMPLING_RATE,
&m_SampleRate );
I get
2
The encoder is initialized with
m_pEncoderState = speex_encoder_init ( &speex_wb_mode );
On the decoder side, the correct sampling rate is returned:
m_pDecoderState = speex_decoder_init ( &speex_wb_mode );
2018 Mar 14
2
Commit module to Git after each Pass
The print-module-after-all type of option exists in upstream:
-print-module-scope - When printing IR for print-[before|after]{-all} always print a module IR
commit 7d160f714357f6784ead669ce516e94991c12e5a
Author: Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com<mailto:fedor.sergeev at azul.com>>
Date: Fri Dec 1 17:42:46 2017 +0000
IR
2019 Mar 13
1
RFC: Getting ProfileSummaryInfo and BlockFrequencyInfo from various types of passes under the new pass manager
On 3/14/19 2:04 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:37 PM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com
> <mailto:fedor.sergeev at azul.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>> - Add a new proxy ModuleAnalysisManagerLoopProxy for a loop pass
>> to be able to get to the ModuleAnalysisManager in one step and
>> PSI through it.
>
2018 Sep 25
2
Porting Pass to New PassManager
Frontends _are_ using PassBuilder, but they need to hook into the default
pipeline creation to insert the sanitizer passes.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 12:15 PM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com>
wrote:
> Hmm... frontends should be using PassBuilder anyway.
> And if they are using PassBuilder then they are using PassRegistry.def as
> well - all the
>
2019 Dec 12
3
Adding custom callback function before/after passes
Hello Fedor.
Thank you for the information.
I made a simple patch that exposes PassInstrumentationCallback so
llvmGetPassPluginInfo can use it: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71086 . Would
this change make sense?
Thanks,
Juneyoung Lee
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:44 AM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On 12/3/19 8:01 PM, Juneyoung Lee via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>
2018 Feb 24
0
CallSiteSplitting and musttail calls
Update:
I was able to make progress on it today ( See
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43729 ). Apparently my problems were:
* Iterating through the instruction/block list after erasing
block/instruction
* Trying to split block after removing one predecessor
Regarding the latter, it appears that semantics of
`DuplicateInstructionsInSplitBetween` change significantly in such case,
and it starts to loop
2018 Sep 28
3
Porting Pass to New PassManager
Is there a reason for why `-asan` and `-asan-module` can be mixed but
Function passes and Module passes with the new PM can't be mixed?
- Leo
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:21 AM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/27/2018 12:25 PM, Philip Pfaffe wrote:
>>
>> `opt < %s -passed='asan' -asan-module -S`
>
> asan-module is another
2018 Sep 26
2
OptBisect implementation for new pass manager
But they're deeply connected. I debug codegen problems all the time.
That opt-bisect doesn't work with codegen is really unfortunate.
If opt-bisect should work with codegen then we need to think about how
codegen will work with the new PM.
I agree that whether or not the new PM becomes default is somewhat
orthogonal but eventually it will and at that point I hope we have a
functioning
2019 Aug 07
2
Status of the New Pass Manager
On 8/7/19 6:20 PM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote:
> I basically run "clang
> -fexperimental-new-pass-manager -print-after-all ..."
>
> It's conceivable that something is different in our setup or in clang
> (from opt)... I'll see if I can reproduce it outside our setup.
Does it depend on machine architecture?
I generally use x86...
regards,
Fedor.
>
> Thanks.
2019 Mar 13
2
RFC: Getting ProfileSummaryInfo and BlockFrequencyInfo from various types of passes under the new pass manager
Overall seems fine to me.
On 3/11/19 8:12 PM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote:
> Here's a revised approach based on the discussion:
>
> - Cache PSI right after the profile summary in the IR is written in
> the pass pipeline. This would avoid the need to insert
> RequireAnalysisPass for PSI before each non-module pass that needs it.
> PSI can be technically invalidated but unlikely
2018 Sep 27
2
Porting Pass to New PassManager
>
> `opt < %s -passed='asan' -asan-module -S`
>
asan-module is another ModulePass, not a commandline option. You can't mix
that like this.
Cheers,
Philip
> doesn't produce the same IR as
>
> `opt < %s -asan -asan-module -S`
>
> More specifically, the only thing missing seems to be the
> `asan.module_ctor` that should get added to the global
2018 Mar 22
2
Commit module to Git after each Pass
Oh, well... as usually the answer appears to be pretty obvious.
99% of the time is spent inside the plain write.
-print-after-all prints into llvm::errs(), which is an *unbuffered*
raw_fd_stream.
And -git-commit-after-all opens a *buffered* raw_fd_stream.
As soon as I hacked -print-after-all to use a buffered stream to stderr
performance went
up to the normal expected values:
] time bin/opt
2018 Nov 08
2
Completeness of -print-after-all
Fedor,
Yes that is what happens in my case that the loop is fully unrolled and hence ‘removed’.
My objection though is that there is still IR that could be dumped (i.e. the function containing the loop that was removed or the entire module) and that is what I want to have dumped after each pass when I specify -print-after-all. Of course there may be certain implementation details that could make
2008 May 19
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
> I have a client who might well make use of an AVR32 port, but I suspect
> that machine is very different than the one you are currently examining.
I have not looked at AVR32 closely but my understanding is that it is a
new architecture that shares a substring with AVR for marketing reasons.
John
2019 Aug 06
2
Status of the New Pass Manager
On 8/6/19 7:31 PM, Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>
> On 8/6/19 3:02 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi via llvm-dev wrote:
>> I had a chance to try -print-after-all with NPM.
>>
>> It seems like there's still no output for the passes
>> before objc-arc-contract (which is basically what I saw before.) Does
>> anyone else see this?
>>
>> Are we