Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Issue with converting users from cyrus user.domain.com"
2012 Nov 13
2
[LLVMdev] loop carried dependence analysis?
Erkan, you're right. Sorry about that.
Attached is the most recent version.
Preston
Hi Preston,
> I am trying to use DA as well. I used your example and commands that you
> wrote in order to get DA information.
> However, it does not report any dependence info.
> I am wondering whether your local copy differs from the one on the
> repository ?
> Thanks.
> Erkan.
2012 Nov 13
2
[LLVMdev] loop carried dependence analysis?
Hi all,
Unfortunately, all my Hunks are failed when I apply : patch -p1 < da.patch
command.
The problem might be due to the fact that da.patch file was created against
revision 167549, but I am on revision 167719 (I believe the most recent
one).
I am not sure if this cause the problem ? But Preston may I ask you to
generate the patch file against revison 167719 ?
Thanks in advance.
On
2012 Nov 13
0
[LLVMdev] loop carried dependence analysis?
Preston, thanks for the explanation and patch. Now it's printing the
direction and distance values.
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Preston Briggs
<preston.briggs at gmail.com>wrote:
> Erkan, you're right. Sorry about that.
> Attached is the most recent version.
>
> Preston
>
>
>
> Hi Preston,
>> I am trying to use DA as well. I used your example
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
The phi instruction is irrelevant; just the way I think about things.
The question is if the allocator believes that t0 and t2 interfere.
Perhaps the coalescing example was too simple.
In the general case, we can't coalesce without a notion of interference.
My worry is that looking at interference by ranges of instruction numbers
leads to inaccuracies when a range is introduced by a copy.
2012 Oct 03
3
[LLVMdev] Does LLVM optimize recursive call?
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy at grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com> writes:
>> Think about costs asymptotically; that's what matters. Calls and
>> returns require constant time, just like addition and multiplication.
>
> Constant time, but not necessarily constant memory.
>
> Deep recursion
2013 May 17
3
[LLVMdev] Inlining sqrt library function in X86
Using the following example program
#include <math.h>
double f(double d){
return sqrt(d);
}
and compiling it with "clang -O3 ...", I was trying to determine what it would take to get the X86 code generator to replace the call to sqrt with a sqrtsd instruction inline.
It turns out that it could do exactly that, were it not for the fact that in the function
2012 Nov 02
2
[LLVMdev] DependenceAnalysis and PR14241
On 11/02/2012 11:02 AM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es>
>> To: "preston briggs" <preston.briggs at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Benjamin Kramer" <benny.kra at gmail.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>> Sent: Friday, November
2012 Nov 14
0
[LLVMdev] loop carried dependence analysis?
On 13.11.2012, at 10:46, erkan diken <erkandiken at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Unfortunately, all my Hunks are failed when I apply : patch -p1 < da.patch
command.
The problem might be due to the fact that da.patch file was created against
revision 167549, but I am on revision 167719 (I believe the most recent
one).
I am not sure if this cause the problem ? But Preston may I ask you to
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
Yes, I quite liked the things I've read about the PBQP allocator.
Given what the hardware folks have to go through to get 1% improvements in
scalar code,
spending 20% (or whatever) compile time (under control of a flag) seems
like nothing.
And falling back on "average code" is a little disingenuous.
People looking for performance don't care about average code;
they care about
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
Hi,
Using Chaitin's approach, removing a copy via coalescing could expose more
opportunities for coalescing.
So he would iteratively rebuild the interference graph and check for more
opportunities.
Chaitin was also careful to make sure that the source and destination of a
copy didn't interfere unnecessarily (because of the copy alone);
that is, his approach to interference was very
2012 Jan 26
0
[LLVMdev] dense maps
My problem was that the constructor for DenseMap has an undocumented
constraint.
explicit DenseMap(unsigned NumInitBuckets = 0) {
init(NumInitBuckets);
}
if given an explicit argument, requires that the argument be a power of 2.
It's checked by an assert in init(), but for some reason my code didn't
trip the assertion.
Is there a special way I must make to enable asserts?
Thanks,
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:25 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com <mailto:preston.briggs at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> The phi instruction is irrelevant; just the way I think about things.
>> The question is if the allocator believes that t0 and t2
2018 Sep 10
2
linear-scan RA
> The underlying liveness datastructure is a list of ranges where each vreg
is alive
> (ranges in terms of instructions numbered). I remember a couple of later
linear scan
> papers describing the same thing (Traub et.al. being the first if I
remember correctly).
> That should be as accurate as you can get in terms of liveness
information.
It depends on the details.
For example, given
2012 Jan 26
5
[LLVMdev] dense maps
Reading the LLVM Programmer's Manual, the description of DenseSet mentions:
*Note that DenseSet has the same requirements for the value type that
DenseMap <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#dss_densemap> has.*
But when I read about DenseMap, I don't really see any requirements for the
values, just a warning about space. On the other hand, the *keys* have
special
2012 Nov 02
2
[LLVMdev] DependenceAnalysis and PR14241
On 11/02/2012 10:21 AM, Preston Briggs wrote:
>
> My initial guess is that a conservative fix is quick and small (make
> sure the underlying pointers are loop invariant, otherwise give up). A
> better approach would be to somehow turn code like the example into
> array references that can be analyzed. I'll need to think about this and
> do some reading.
Hi Preston,
I looked
2012 Oct 17
2
[LLVMdev] Problem with PostRASchedulerList.cpp - advice wanted
When you compile the attached file using
llc -march=x86 -mcpu=atom sched-bug.ll -o -
The Post-RA scheduler changes the sequence
movl %ecx, (%esp)
bsfl (%esp),%eax # this came from inline assembly code
to read
bsfl (%esp),%eax # this came from inline assembly code
movl %ecx, (%esp)
This is an incorrect schedule, because it seems the scheduler is not aware that the memory
2005 Oct 23
4
Anyone use a Rio Cali Sport with CentOS 4.2?
My wife does and here's the problem. It automatically mounts the flash
memory of the player. But it doesn't mount the SD card slot. I used Ubuntu
5.10 recently and it mounted both of them. Both as separate USB sticks.
How do I get CentOS to do the same thing? Or can it not discern that two
USB flash devices are plugged in?
Preston
2012 Apr 05
3
[LLVMdev] SIV tests in LoopDependence Analysis, Sanjoy's patch
Hi Sanjoy,
Reading through LoopDependenceAnalysis::analyseStrongSIV(), I noticed one
problem and one confusion.
My confusion related to your naming of the two instructions as A and B.
It's consistent all through LoopDependenceAnalysis. I'd prefer something
like source and destination, so I can keep track of which is which. It
didn't matter so much when you were simply proving or
2013 Feb 05
2
[LLVMdev] The MBlaze backend: can we remove it?
>
> The MBlaze backend seems to be essentially unmaintained since 2011. The
> maintainer (Wesley Peck who is BCC'ed) seems to have vanished, and in fact
> all emails to him are bouncing.
> I propose to remove the MBlaze backend on Friday if none step forward as a
> maintainer. Currently, folks are having to keep it up to date when changing
> shared parts of the backend
2012 Oct 08
3
[LLVMdev] SCEV bottom value
I'd like a value, call it Bottom, such that
SE->getAddExpr(Bottom, X) => Bottom
SE->getMulExpr(Bottom, X,) => Bottom
isKnownPredicate(any, Bottom, X) => false
etc.
I can write code to make NULL work like I want, but it would be simpler if
something was already defined. I'm wondering about SCEV::Unknown. The
documentation suggests I could perhaps use it for a