search for: _m128

...on win32), and the problem > was that the stack was misaligned when entering the function, so the temp > registers weren't at 16-byte boundries. That's a possibility. It's easy to check by printing the address of the variables. I know that gcc 3.3 had some alignment issues with _m128 that were supposed to be fixed in version 3.4 and above. Jean-Marc

Hi all, Recently, Reid Kleckner found an ABI incompatibility between clang and GCC in the way vector parameters are passed on 32-bit x86. (This is documented in PR21510.) Specifically, GCC uses XMM0-XMM2 to pass the first 3 __m128 parameters, and the rest are passed on the stack. Clang passes an additional parameter by register, using XMM0-XMM3. The same applies to __m256 with YMM0-2 vs. YMM0-3. In theory, it would apply to __m512 as well, but currently clang doesn't support passing __m512 in x86 mode at all. ICC has the...

Jean-Marc, Good catch on the debug mode. After compiling the same code in release mode it does appear to be using all the registers correctly. Give us a few days to integrate our run-time flags into 1.1.4 and I will let you know how are testing turns out. Aron Rosenberg SightSpeed At 08:54 PM 1/21/2004, you wrote: > > 1. Compile Error with regular mode (FIXED_POINT undefined)

...rrectly. Give > us a few days to integrate our run-time flags into 1.1.4 and I will let you > know how are testing turns out. Just a note. With the last optimization I did in cb_search.c, it's no longer easy to have a run-time SSE flag. The reason is that there is now data exchanged in _m128 format between some functions (even the layout of the values changes if you turn SSE on). Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin, M.Sc.A., ing. jr. LABORIUS (http://www.gel.usherb.ca/laborius) Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment...

That's definitely strange and I've never encountered that. Normally, the only way for _mm_load_ups to generate a segfault is for the input to be invalid memory, in which case the C version should crash too. I suspect the compiler (or something else) may be hiding the real problem. Can you get a debugger and see exactly what assembly statement is causing the crash and what the operands are?

...roblem >> was that the stack was misaligned when entering the function, so the temp >> registers weren't at 16-byte boundries. > > That's a possibility. It's easy to check by printing the address of the > variables. I know that gcc 3.3 had some alignment issues with _m128 that > were supposed to be fixed in version 3.4 and above. I just checked it in the debugger, and this was with gcc 3.4.4 (mingw)... And the addresses were not properly aligned :( From a bit of googling, this seems to be a thread problem, as the gcc just maintains 16-byte alignment of the st...

...ew days to integrate our run-time flags into 1.1.4 and I will let > you > > know how are testing turns out. > >Just a note. With the last optimization I did in cb_search.c, it's no >longer easy to have a run-time SSE flag. The reason is that there is now >data exchanged in _m128 format between some functions (even the layout >of the values changes if you turn SSE on). > > Jean-Marc > >-- >Jean-Marc Valin, M.Sc.A., ing. jr. >LABORIUS (http://www.gel.usherb.ca/laborius) >Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada <p>--- >8 ---- List ar...