search for: autovectorisation

Hello Everyone, I've been looking at benchmarks of LLVM recently, and overall they look pretty good. Aside from things that use OpenMP or benefit from autovectorisation, Clang/LLVM and GCC seem to come fairly close, with no overall winner. But: there do seem to have been a number of performance regressions between 2.9 and 3.0: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1110178-AR-1110173AR66 Identifying where these were introduced is quite difficult. I wonder if some...

Hi Nadav, Unfortunately I'm not attending the dev meeting, but the BoF looks interesting. One thing that I'd like to throw into the mix is that, while dealing with autovectorisation of LLVM compiled down from C-like languages (or maybe Fortran-like languages) is clearly a very big area for fruitful work both algorithmically and in terms of practical relevance, it'd also be interesting to see what LLVM complied from languages with semantics that are more open to optimizatio...

On Nov 14, 2011, at 10:46 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > I've been looking at benchmarks of LLVM recently, and overall they look pretty good. Aside from things that use OpenMP or benefit from autovectorisation, Clang/LLVM and GCC seem to come fairly close, with no overall winner. Nice. Thanks. > > But: there do seem to have been a number of performance regressions between 2.9 and 3.0: > > http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1110178-AR-1110173AR66 > > Identifying where these were int...

Hi David! On Nov 6, 2012, at 3:23 AM, David Tweed <david.tweed at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nadav, > > Unfortunately I'm not attending the dev meeting, but the BoF looks interesting. One thing that I'd like to throw into the mix is that, while dealing with autovectorisation of LLVM compiled down from C-like languages (or maybe Fortran-like languages) is clearly a very big area for fruitful work both algorithmically and in terms of practical relevance, it'd also be interesting to see what LLVM complied from languages with semantics that are more open to optimizatio...

Pekka Jääskeläinen <pekka.jaaskelainen at tut.fi> writes: > E.g., the last time I checked, the inner loop vectorizer (which pocl exploits) > just refused to vectorize loops with vector instructions. It might not > be so drastic with the SLP or the BB vectorizer, but in general, it might > make sense to let the vectorizer to do the decisions on how to map the > parallel

Hi, I found out that Auto-Vectorization was implemented as a part of GSoC 2009. Can someone point me to the code repository including any documentation available? I would also like to know if there is any progress/future plans to include this in the main trunk? Best Regards, Raj

Hi, Great to see someone working on this. This will benefit the performance portability goal of the pocl's OpenCL kernel compiler. It has been one of the low hanging fruits in improving its implicit WG vectorization applicability. The use case there is that sometimes it makes sense to devectorize the explicitly used vector datatype code of OpenCL kernels in order to make better opportunities

..., at 3:23 AM, David Tweed <david.tweed at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Nadav, > > > > Unfortunately I'm not attending the dev meeting, but the BoF looks > > interesting. One thing that I'd like to throw into the mix is > > that, while dealing with autovectorisation of LLVM compiled down > > from C-like languages (or maybe Fortran-like languages) is clearly > > a very big area for fruitful work both algorithmically and in > > terms of practical relevance, it'd also be interesting to see what > > LLVM complied from languages with sem...

...<david.tweed at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Nadav, >> > >> > Unfortunately I'm not attending the dev meeting, but the BoF looks >> > interesting. One thing that I'd like to throw into the mix is >> > that, while dealing with autovectorisation of LLVM compiled down >> > from C-like languages (or maybe Fortran-like languages) is clearly >> > a very big area for fruitful work both algorithmically and in >> > terms of practical relevance, it'd also be interesting to see what >> > LLVM complied from la...

...an.cheng at apple.com> a écrit : > > On Nov 14, 2011, at 10:46 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > > > Hello Everyone, > > > > I've been looking at benchmarks of LLVM recently, and overall they look > pretty good. Aside from things that use OpenMP or benefit from > autovectorisation, Clang/LLVM and GCC seem to come fairly close, with no > overall winner. > > Nice. Thanks. > > > > > But: there do seem to have been a number of performance regressions > between 2.9 and 3.0: > > > > http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1110178-AR-1110173AR66 &g...

Hello, For a while I've been working on an LLVM backend for Broadcom's VideoCore 4, the GPU made famous by the Raspberry Pi. This isn't the QPU, for which Broadcom released docs a little while ago; it's the main processor, which is a VC4 core. It's a rather elegant thing with two cores, 32 registers, a built-in DSP and an extremely nice instruction set; reverse engineered