aaupov wrote:
> Do you have benchmarks on how well this performs relative to standard IRPGO
> (or on top of it)?
Couple of things to untangle here:
1. In general, CSSPGO is meant as a more practical alternative for IRPGO thanks
to i) the use of sampled profile, ii) context-sensitivity. However
https://github.com/farzonl created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79948
HLSL has a tan builtin defined here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/direct3dhlsl/dx-graphics-hlsl-tan
Currently HLSL builtins redirect to clang builtins. However there is no
tan clang builtin tod
aaupov wrote:
Linking the preprint of the paper accepted to CGO'24 which has a CSSPGO
performance comparison with AutoFDO and Instr PGO (Fig. 6):
https://htyu.github.io/paper/Revamping_Sampling_based_PGO_with_Context_sensitivity_and_Pseudo_instrumentation_preprint.pdf
https://github.com/llvm/l
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-hlsl
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Farzon Lotfi (farzonl)
Changes
HLSL has a tan builtin defined here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/direct3dhlsl/dx-graphics-hlsl-tan
Currently HLSL builtins redirect to clang builtins. However the
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78890
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78890
>From 549e4ea5b292e558e085d881abd4c93f29352029 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fangrui Song
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:25:34 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?[=F0=9D=98=80=F0=9D=97=BD=F0=9D=97=BF]=20initia?=
=?UTF
MaskRay wrote:
> It looks like some of the tests might be failing? Or does it need a rebase?
Sorry about it. The last minute `FastISel` change caused some failures.
`Addr.getGlobalValue()` could be null. I have simplified `AArch64FastISel.cpp`
to just check `"RtLibUseGOT"` (added by `-fno-plt`
https://github.com/arsenm approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79905
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
farzonl wrote:
Test results:
```
Total Discovered Tests: 93648
Skipped :56 (0.06%)
Unsupported : 2502 (2.67%)
Passed : 90779 (96.94%)
Expectedly Failed: 204 (0.22%)
Failed : 107 (0.11%)
```
Of the test I added all are passing:
https://github.c
Author: Piyou Chen
Date: 2024-01-30T14:33:52+08:00
New Revision: d09082f6fd517759e5c0874a2e73bddd550de299
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d09082f6fd517759e5c0874a2e73bddd550de299
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d09082f6fd517759e5c0874a2e73bddd550de299.diff
LO
https://github.com/BeMg closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ian-twilightcoder approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79879
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
boomanaiden154 wrote:
> In general, CSSPGO is meant as a more practical alternative for IRPGO thanks
> to i) the use of sampled profile, ii) context-sensitivity. However, IRPGO is
> still expected to provide better performance in all cases where it's
> applicable thanks to accurate profile inf
https://github.com/Lewuathe commented:
@joker-eph @matthias-springer I've fixed a bug in the previous PR that caused
the integration test failure in the previous change. Could you review this
change when you get a chance?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76316
https://github.com/llvm
https://github.com/ampandey-1995 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79795
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
karka228 wrote:
Ping.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74440
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/cor3ntin approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79881
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/matthias-springer approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79786
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
mikaelholmen wrote:
> > > Is this expected and wanted?
> >
> >
> > Good catch! I would not expect that diagnostic; we should silence the
> > diagnostic if it's used in a `#ifdef`, `#elifdef`, or `defined` because the
> > value isn't necessary. Perhaps we should also silence something like
>
https://github.com/efriedma-quic edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79948
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/efriedma-quic requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79948
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1010,6 +1010,7 @@ let IntrProperties = [IntrNoMem, IntrSpeculatable,
IntrWillReturn] in {
def int_powi : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_anyfloat_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>,
llvm_anyint_ty]>;
def int_sin : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_anyfloat_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>]>;
def
https://github.com/efriedma-quic edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79948
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1010,6 +1010,7 @@ let IntrProperties = [IntrNoMem, IntrSpeculatable,
IntrWillReturn] in {
def int_powi : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_anyfloat_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>,
llvm_anyint_ty]>;
def int_sin : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_anyfloat_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>]>;
def
https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79959
Close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/79240
Cite the comment from @mizvekov in
//github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/79240:
> There are two kinds of bugs / issues relevant here:
>
> Clang bugs tha
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-modules
Author: Chuanqi Xu (ChuanqiXu9)
Changes
Close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/79240
Cite the comment from @mizvekov in
//github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/79240:
> There are two kinds of bugs / issues relevant here:
>
> Clan
501 - 526 of 526 matches
Mail list logo
