Use one-sided binary search for lower_bound on non-random iterators. #1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ichaer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2024
…ass template explict specializations (llvm#78720) According to [[dcl.type.elab] p2](http://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.type.elab#2): > If an [elaborated-type-specifier](http://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.type.elab#nt:elaborated-type-specifier) is the sole constituent of a declaration, the declaration is ill-formed unless it is an explicit specialization, an explicit instantiation or it has one of the following forms [...] Consider the following: ```cpp template<typename T> struct A { template<typename U> struct B; }; template<> template<typename U> struct A<int>::B; // #1 ``` The _elaborated-type-specifier_ at `#1` declares an explicit specialization (which is itself a template). We currently (incorrectly) reject this, and this PR fixes that. I moved the point at which _elaborated-type-specifiers_ with _nested-name-specifiers_ are diagnosed from `ParsedFreeStandingDeclSpec` to `ActOnTag` for two reasons: `ActOnTag` isn't called for explicit instantiations and partial/explicit specializations, and because it's where we determine if a member specialization is being declared. With respect to diagnostics, I am currently issuing the diagnostic without marking the declaration as invalid or returning early, which results in more diagnostics that I think is necessary. I would like feedback regarding what the "correct" behavior should be here.
ichaer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2024
…ing bound ops (llvm#80317) `getDataOperandBaseAddr` retrieve the address of a value when we need to generate bound operations. When switching to HLFIR, we did not really handle the fact that this value was then pointing to the result of a hlfir.declare. Because of that the `#1` value was being used. `#0` value is carrying the correct information about lowerbounds and should be used. This patch updates the `getDataOperandBaseAddr` function to use the correct result value from hlfir.declare.
ichaer
changed the title
ichaer
force-pushed
the
onesided_lower_bound_private
branch
from
b97697a to
26a63ae
Compare
…e have reproducible, consistent, and comparable results.
ichaer
force-pushed
the
onesided_lower_bound_private
branch
from
26a63ae to
7c556b6
Compare
…arge number plus gbench's auto-tuned iteration count mean lower_bound() takes multiple days to finish on my hardware. I've increased the number for the larger container sizes, though.
ichaer
force-pushed
the
onesided_lower_bound_private
branch
from
1d9d918 to
c6c6814
Compare
…sWithDataFilter()` allows filtering generated value vectors to do more complex data preparation. This allows me to perform all pre-work outside the hot gbench loop, improving accuracy of measurements of the very fast `std::lower_bound()`. Also, use constness in the return type of the filter as a signal to elide copies, saving much memory and time :).
ichaer
force-pushed
the
onesided_lower_bound_private
branch
from
c6c6814 to
36e975e
Compare
ichaer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 1, 2024
…linux (llvm#99613) Examples of the output: ARM: ``` # ./a.out AddressSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL ================================================================= ==122==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x0000007a (pc 0x76e13ac0 bp 0x7eb7fd00 sp 0x7eb7fcc8 T0) ==122==The signal is caused by a READ memory access. ==122==Hint: address points to the zero page. #0 0x76e13ac0 (/lib/libc.so.6+0x7cac0) #1 0x76dce680 in gsignal (/lib/libc.so.6+0x37680) llvm#2 0x005c2250 (/root/a.out+0x145250) llvm#3 0x76db982c (/lib/libc.so.6+0x2282c) llvm#4 0x76db9918 in __libc_start_main (/lib/libc.so.6+0x22918) ==122==Register values: r0 = 0x00000000 r1 = 0x0000007a r2 = 0x0000000b r3 = 0x76d95020 r4 = 0x0000007a r5 = 0x00000001 r6 = 0x005dcc5c r7 = 0x0000010c r8 = 0x0000000b r9 = 0x76f9ece0 r10 = 0x00000000 r11 = 0x7eb7fd00 r12 = 0x76dce670 sp = 0x7eb7fcc8 lr = 0x76e13ab4 pc = 0x76e13ac0 AddressSanitizer can not provide additional info. SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: SEGV (/lib/libc.so.6+0x7cac0) ==122==ABORTING ``` AArch64: ``` # ./a.out UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL ==99==ERROR: UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x000000000063 (pc 0x007fbbbc5860 bp 0x007fcfdcb700 sp 0x007fcfdcb700 T99) ==99==The signal is caused by a UNKNOWN memory access. ==99==Hint: address points to the zero page. #0 0x007fbbbc5860 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x82860) #1 0x007fbbb81578 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x3e578) llvm#2 0x00556051152c (/root/a.out+0x3152c) llvm#3 0x007fbbb6e268 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2b268) llvm#4 0x007fbbb6e344 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2b344) llvm#5 0x0055604e45ec (/root/a.out+0x45ec) ==99==Register values: x0 = 0x0000000000000000 x1 = 0x0000000000000063 x2 = 0x000000000000000b x3 = 0x0000007fbbb41440 x4 = 0x0000007fbbb41580 x5 = 0x3669288942d44cce x6 = 0x0000000000000000 x7 = 0x00000055605110b0 x8 = 0x0000000000000083 x9 = 0x0000000000000000 x10 = 0x0000000000000000 x11 = 0x0000000000000000 x12 = 0x0000007fbbdb3360 x13 = 0x0000000000010000 x14 = 0x0000000000000039 x15 = 0x00000000004113a0 x16 = 0x0000007fbbb81560 x17 = 0x0000005560540138 x18 = 0x000000006474e552 x19 = 0x0000000000000063 x20 = 0x0000000000000001 x21 = 0x000000000000000b x22 = 0x0000005560511510 x23 = 0x0000007fcfdcb918 x24 = 0x0000007fbbdb1b50 x25 = 0x0000000000000000 x26 = 0x0000007fbbdb2000 x27 = 0x000000556053f858 x28 = 0x0000000000000000 fp = 0x0000007fcfdcb700 lr = 0x0000007fbbbc584c sp = 0x0000007fcfdcb700 UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer can not provide additional info. SUMMARY: UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer: SEGV (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x82860) ==99==ABORTING ```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.