impala-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nishidha Panpaliya" <>
Subject Fw: LLVM codegen functionality
Date Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:58:34 GMT

Hi Jim,

Thank you for your reply. Links that you sent us helped to understand the
impact. But I believe, if it is only performance related and not blocking
any Impala's feature, we can still live with that issue if it is just not
possible to fix either for LLVM community or for us. Please correct me if I

On another note, I could fix gcc 4.9.3 issue with ALTIVEC and could build
Impala with it on power. And llvm-codegen test passed on it. So, if
everything else works with this setup, we would rather go with gcc 4.9.3 on
power for Impala.

Thanks again for helping us always.


----- Forwarded by Nishidha Panpaliya/Austin/Contr/IBM on 06/14/2016 07:17
PM -----

From:	Sudarshan Jagadale/Austin/Contr/IBM
To:	Nishidha Panpaliya/Austin/Contr/IBM@IBMUS
Date:	06/14/2016 10:35 AM
Subject:	Fw: LLVM codegen functionality

Thanks and Regards
Sudarshan Jagadale
Power Open Source Solutions
----- Forwarded by Sudarshan Jagadale/Austin/Contr/IBM on 06/14/2016 10:34
AM -----

From:	Jim Apple <>
Cc:	Silvius Rus <>, Manish
            Patil/Austin/Contr/IBM@IBMUS, Sudarshan
            Jagadale/Austin/Contr/IBM@IBMUS, Valencia
            Serrao/Austin/Contr/IBM@IBMUS, Anup
Date:	06/13/2016 08:33 PM
Subject:	Re: LLVM codegen functionality

LLVM codegen has a significant (and good) effect on performance.

As for GCC/altivec problems, you might want to file a bug suggesting
that the toolchain use a newer GCC.

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Nishidha Panpaliya <>
> Hi All,
> We wanted to know about the significance of llvm codegen feature in
> For us, it is failing on power. And so far, it seems to be due to
> incompatibility of LLVM 3.8 with gcc 5.
> And building Impala on ppc64le with gcc 4.9 is giving lot of other errors
> related to Altivec library. Even LLVM community have no plans to provide
> this as a hotfix before 3.9 release. So, we wanted to know how
> is this functionality. Can we move ahead with this one issue left? What
> features are impacted or how users will be affected due to this feature.
> Thanks,
> Nishidha

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message