Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "allowreciprocal".
Did you mean:
allow_reciprocal
2012 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
...FMF.NoNaNs = 0 != (Record[OpNum] & (1 << bitc::FMF_NO_NANS));
2048 FMF.NoInfs = 0 != (Record[OpNum] & (1 << bitc::FMF_NO_INFS));
2049 FMF.NoSignedZeros = 0 != (Record[OpNum] & (1 << bitc::FMF_NO_SIGNED_ZEROS));
2050 FMF.AllowReciprocal = 0 != (Record[OpNum] & (1 << bitc::FMF_ALLOW_RECIPROCAL));
I found some more in BitcodeReader::ParseConstants(), which I'll scrub after this commits.
Will there be a // fmul N 1, x ==> x? perhaps a // fadd N S 0, x ==> x? as well as other arithmetic identities?
Cheers,
Jo...
2012 Nov 16
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
...3:23 PM, Joe Abbey <joe.abbey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Though semantically equivalent in this case, however I think you should use logical ors here not bitwise.
>>
>> + bool any() {
>> + return UnsafeAlgebra | NoNaNs | NoInfs | NoSignedZeros |
>> + AllowReciprocal;
>> + }
>>
>
> Will do.
>
>> Gripe: This pattern is probably super fast and has precedence… but the code is non-obvious:
>>
>> SubclassOptionalData =
>> (SubclassOptionalData & ~BitToSet) | (B * BitToSet);
>>
>
> This is an exist...
2012 Nov 15
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
Though semantically equivalent in this case, however I think you should use logical ors here not bitwise.
+ bool any() {
+ return UnsafeAlgebra | NoNaNs | NoInfs | NoSignedZeros |
+ AllowReciprocal;
+ }
Gripe: This pattern is probably super fast and has precedence… but the code is non-obvious:
SubclassOptionalData =
(SubclassOptionalData & ~BitToSet) | (B * BitToSet);
This is likely one iota slower.. but it sure is easier to get the intent.
B ? SubclassOptionalData |= BitToSet :...
2012 Nov 15
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
On Nov 15, 2012, at 3:23 PM, Joe Abbey <joe.abbey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Though semantically equivalent in this case, however I think you should use logical ors here not bitwise.
>
> + bool any() {
> + return UnsafeAlgebra | NoNaNs | NoInfs | NoSignedZeros |
> + AllowReciprocal;
> + }
>
Will do.
> Gripe: This pattern is probably super fast and has precedence… but the code is non-obvious:
>
> SubclassOptionalData =
> (SubclassOptionalData & ~BitToSet) | (B * BitToSet);
>
This is an existing pattern that's used elsewhere in the file, so...
2012 Nov 15
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
Trying to apply patches..
What's your base revision?
Joe
On Nov 15, 2012, at 5:44 PM, Michael Ilseman <milseman at apple.com> wrote:
> New patches with review feedback incorporated:
> * Changed single letter flags to short abbreviations ('S' ==> 'nsz')
> * Indentation fixes
> * Comments don't state function names
>
>
2012 Nov 15
3
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] fast-math patches!
New patches with review feedback incorporated:
* Changed single letter flags to short abbreviations ('S' ==> 'nsz')
* Indentation fixes
* Comments don't state function names
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0002-Fast-math-flags-added-to-FPMathOperator.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4937 bytes
Desc: not
2017 Oct 04
2
Trouble when suppressing a portion of fast-math-transformations
> It might be clearer, instead of using 'libm', to use something like 'trans' (for transcendental functions).
That does seem clearer. ‘trans’ is definitely good with me.
-Warren
From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:13 PM
To: Ristow, Warren; Bruce Hoult
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Trouble when suppressing a