similar to: Performance and precompute_partition_info_sums_32bit_asm_ia32_()

All(?) non-static functions have FLAC__ prefix. But precompute_partition_info_sums_32bit_asm_ia32_() and ..._intrin_sse2() and ..._intrin_ssse3() don't have it. This patch adds the prefix to them. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FLAC__prefix.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 6396 bytes Desc: not available Url :

FYI, The CRC64 intrinsics were renamed to CRC32 since there is no such thing. See below for details. Chad On May 26, 2011, at 4:13 PM, Chad Rosier wrote: > Author: mcrosier > Date: Thu May 26 18:13:19 2011 > New Revision: 132163 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=132163&view=rev > Log: > Renamed llvm.x86.sse42.crc32 intrinsics; crc64 doesn't exist.

Hi, When setting -mattr option on X86, I would like to treat MMX separately from SSE levels. This would allow a client who sets the attributes directly to set the SSE level independent of MMX, e.g., llc -march=x86 -mattr=sse41, one would get sse4.1 with mmx disabled while llc -march=x86 -mattr=mmx -mattr=sse42 will get mmx and sse42. If anyone objects to this change, please let me

--- Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 02:51:34PM -0700, Josh Coalson wrote: > > > checked in to CVS is what will be very close to the 1.2.1 release > > of flac scheduled for monday. if anyone can try building it and > > even better running the test suite, and reporting back any > problems, > > that will help me get things in

They are not needed since the section is defined in nasm.h. --- src/libFLAC/ia32/bitreader_asm.nasm | 4 ---- src/libFLAC/ia32/cpu_asm.nasm | 4 ---- src/libFLAC/ia32/fixed_asm.nasm | 4 ---- src/libFLAC/ia32/lpc_asm.nasm | 4 ---- src/libFLAC/ia32/stream_encoder_asm.nasm | 4 ---- 5 files changed, 20 deletions(-) diff --git

Might you instead consider just adding a -disable-mmx option? Preston On Thu, 2008-20-11 at 02:57 -0500, Mon Ping Wang wrote: > Hi, > > When setting -mattr option on X86, I would like to treat MMX > separately from SSE levels. This would allow a client who sets the > attributes directly to set the SSE level independent of MMX, e.g., llc > -march=x86 -mattr=sse41, one would get

On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:57 PMPST, Mon Ping Wang wrote: > Hi, > > When setting -mattr option on X86, I would like to treat MMX > separately from SSE levels. This would allow a client who sets the > attributes directly to set the SSE level independent of MMX, e.g., llc > -march=x86 -mattr=sse41, one would get sse4.1 with mmx disabled while > llc -march=x86 -mattr=mmx

Hi Dale, I will not change the default. I would dislike to see any regressions due to this type of change. -- Mon Ping On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:12 AM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:57 PMPST, Mon Ping Wang wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> When setting -mattr option on X86, I would like to treat MMX >> separately from SSE levels. This would allow a

On Nov 20, 2008, at 8:31 AM, Preston Gurd wrote: > Might you instead consider just adding a -disable-mmx option? I agree, this is a better approach. This distinguishes between capabilities of the chip and the desire to codegen specific vectors one way or another. -Chris > > Preston > > On Thu, 2008-20-11 at 02:57 -0500, Mon Ping Wang wrote: >> Hi, >> >>

Hello, Can someone give me an idea of the memory requirements for using libFLAC? I'm trying to incorporate FLAC support into a player application for the Rio Receiver (see http://rioreceiver.comms.net for details), but I'm having trouble because FLAC__stream_decoder_new() is attempting to allocate 2099828 bytes for an instance of the FLAC__StreamDecoderPrivate struct. Is this accurate,

Hi, In the following instruction sequence, llvm.objectsize.i64(p) returns 6 (the entire *.ll is attached to the mail). Is this correct? Shouldn't the "object" refer to the entire block of memory being allocated? (char*) p = malloc(56) llvm.objectisize.i32(p+50); Thanks Shuxin This question is related to PR14988 (failure in bootstrap build with LTO). Part of the

Hi all, I think we're getting close to the first FLAC release in over 4 years. I have tested whats currently in Git on x86, x86_64 and PowerPC Linux and would appreciate reports of successful compiles (and even more importantly any failures) on OSX, Windows and elsewhere. Cheers, Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo

Hello everyone. Due to problems with libsndfile's handling of FLAC files, Mixxx is going to use libFLAC directly in v1.9.0. I'm the Windows packager and am trying to build libFLAC on Windows x64 using MSVC 2008 and the following steps that I've put together: http://mixxx.org/wiki/doku.php/build_windows_dependencies#libflac The problems I have are the following: If I try to build the

This patch moves all info->ia32.fxsr = info->ia32.sse = info->ia32.sse2 = info->ia32.sse3 = info->ia32.ssse3 = info->ia32.sse41 = info->ia32.sse42 = false; expressions into a static function disable_sse(FLAC__CPUInfo *info). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: simplify_cpu_c.zip Type: application/zip Size: 1163 bytes Desc:

lvqcl wrote: > 1) > Current MSVC solution (FLAC.sln and numerous .vcproj files) was made with > VC2005 Express and doesn't allow to build 64-bit files/libraries. > > IMHO it's time to add 64-bit support for MSVC builds, but AFAIK only Visual Studio > 2012/2013 Express are free and allow to build 64-bit files. > > VS 2005/2008 use .vcproj files, and VS

I have also asked this question on stackoverflow (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8694676/compiling-64-bit-flac-libflac-in-os-x-lion), which you can answer if you're interested in reputation points. I am very unfamiliar with compiling C/C++ source of this size, and I'm having trouble debugging the issue. Basically, in the root folder of the FLAC bundle, even if I use the flags

This is a bit premature to be considered a code review, but given how unfamiliar I am with SelectionDAG (& that I'm seeing somewhat more 'interesting' results compared to my change to FastISel) I wanted to get a bit of feedback to see if I was on the right track or had missed any obvious cases. I've attached my patch in progress (including a modification to the existing test

lvqcl wrote: > Audacity still uses VS2008 and slowly tries to migrate to VS2012. > But as stated at <http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Developing_On_Windows>, > "Audacity is currently a 32-bit only application". So it doesn't need > 64-bit builds. > Currently its trunk contains 'audacity.sln' made with Visual C++ Express 2008 > and

We have quite a lot of code in AutoUpgrade.cpp to upgrade X86 intrinsics that have been replaced with native IR over the years. Has enough time and/or versions passed that we can begin phasing out some of this code? As I'm writing these we don't seem to have tests for a lot of the older upgrades. We've done better at this in the last few years. 3.1 added upgrade for:

Is there a reason why? IE is it hard to maintain, slow, or are you just worried it will break? or something else? (I'm not opposed in any way, literally just want to understand the motivation) On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Craig Topper via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > We have quite a lot of code in AutoUpgrade.cpp to upgrade X86 intrinsics > that have