search for: chareo

...to data flow conversion). I'll be happy to give you more detail on this if you want to :). I could imagine there are other things that could make use of this, or am I wrong with that? Cheers, Ralf On 5/7/12 11:58 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > On May 7, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi Duncan, >> >> On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>> Hi Ralf, >>> >>>> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >>>> BasicBlocks? >>> >>> not at the moment....

On May 7, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Duncan, > > On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> Hi Ralf, >> >>> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >>> BasicBlocks? >> >> not at the moment. Feel free to work on adding this funct...

On 5/9/12 2:01 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > On May 7, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi Dan, >> >> I am using it to store results of a vectorization analysis. A BasicBlock has certain properties in this context, e.g. we mark control flow that may never diverge in different instances ("threads" if you think in terms of CUDA)...

...----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Gohman Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 00:58 To: Ralf Karrenberg Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Metadata for Argument, BasicBlock On May 7, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Duncan, > > On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> Hi Ralf, >> >>> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >>> BasicBlocks? >> >> not at the moment. Feel free to work on adding this func...

On May 7, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I am using it to store results of a vectorization analysis. A BasicBlock has certain properties in this context, e.g. we mark control flow that may never diverge in different instances ("threads" if you think in terms of CUDA) of the same fun...

Its a good point. We will need to document the semantics of the vectorization pragma well. On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Nadav, > > On 14/11/13 17:38, Nadav Rotem wrote: >> Sure. Vectorization of stores is done by loading the current value from memory, blending the new value and saving it back to memory. > > Just a side note: You may run into trouble with this appro...

Hi Duncan, On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Ralf, > >> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >> BasicBlocks? > > not at the moment. Feel free to work on adding this functionality! I am looking into that now. I decided to temporarily go for the following syntax for BasicBlock metadata (subject to discussion): entry:

On May 8, 2012, at 11:37 PM, Ralf Karrenberg wrote: > On 5/9/12 2:01 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: >> >> On May 7, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: >> >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> I am using it to store results of a vectorization analysis. A BasicBlock has certain properties in this context, e.g. we mark control flow that may never diverge in different instances ("threads" if you think...

Hi Ralf, FYI, old JIT doesn't support AVX at all, no encoding info, etc... The only way to use AVX+JIT is using MCJIT, which contains the correct encoding, but unfortunately the framework isn't good yet as the old one is. On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Matt, > > I am unsure about MCJIT, but I guess the problem is the same. > Just like when invoking llc, you need to pass the information to use AVX > (llc -mattr=+avx). > I guess the corresponding code should look like this: > >     llvm::EngineBuil...

On 21 September 2012 09:51, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi, > > Simon Moll (in CC) has written a decompiler for LLVM in his Bachelor's > Thesis here at Saarland University. The thesis is titled "Decompilation of > LLVM IR" and can be found here: > http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/publications/ > &...

On 5/9/12 5:08 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > On May 8, 2012, at 11:37 PM, Ralf Karrenberg wrote: > >> On 5/9/12 2:01 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: >>> >>> On May 7, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Dan, >>>> >>>> I am using it to store results of a vectorization analysis. A BasicBlock has certain properties in this context, e.g. we mark control flow that may never diverge in different instances ("threads&quo...

...s.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Gohman > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 00:58 > To: Ralf Karrenberg > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu List > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Metadata for Argument, BasicBlock > > > On May 7, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi Duncan, >> >> On 5/6/12 6:12 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>> Hi Ralf, >>> >>>> Is there a clean way to attach metadata nodes to Arguments and/or >>>> BasicBlocks? >>> >>> not at the moment....

Hi Ralf On Wednesday, June 1, 2011, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hi, > > The last time the AVX backend was mentioned on this list seems to be > from November 2010, so I would like to ask about the current status. Is > anybody (e.g. at Cray?) still actively working on it? I don't think so! > I have tried both LLVM 2...

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pekka Jääskeläinen" <pekka.jaaskelainen at tut.fi> > To: "Ralf Karrenberg" <Chareos at gmx.de> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 11:15:43 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LoopVectorizer in OpenCL C work group autovectorization > > Hi Ralf, > > On 01/31/2013 05:44 PM, Ralf Karrenber...

...FYI, old JIT doesn't support AVX at all, no encoding info, etc... The > only way to use AVX+JIT is using MCJIT, which contains the correct > encoding, but unfortunately the framework isn't good yet as the old > one is. > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: >> Hi Matt, >> >> I am unsure about MCJIT, but I guess the problem is the same. >> Just like when invoking llc, you need to pass the information to use AVX >> (llc -mattr=+avx). >> I guess the corresponding code should look like this: >&...

Hi, The last time the AVX backend was mentioned on this list seems to be from November 2010, so I would like to ask about the current status. Is anybody (e.g. at Cray?) still actively working on it? I have tried both LLVM 2.9 final and the latest trunk, and it seems like some trivial stuff is already working and produces nice code for code using <8 x float>. Unfortunately, the backend

Bruno Cardoso Lopes <bruno.cardoso at gmail.com> writes: > Hi Ralf > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2011, Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The last time the AVX backend was mentioned on this list seems to be >> from November 2010, so I would like to ask about the current status. Is >> anybody (e.g. at Cray?) still actively working on it? > > I don't think so!...

...39;t support AVX at all, no encoding info, etc... The >> only way to use AVX+JIT is using MCJIT, which contains the correct >> encoding, but unfortunately the framework isn't good yet as the old >> one is. >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: >>> Hi Matt, >>> >>> I am unsure about MCJIT, but I guess the problem is the same. >>> Just like when invoking llc, you need to pass the information to use AVX >>> (llc -mattr=+avx). >>> I guess the corresponding code sho...

Hello everyone, I'd like to know if there is an optimization in llvm doing something like an if-conversion on the IR. I only found IfConversion.cpp which appears to only provide the desired functionality on machine code during code-generation. I want to transform branches into serial code with select-instructions as a pre-processing step for further transformations. If there is no such

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Ralf Karrenberg<Chareos at gmx.de> wrote: > Hey Daniel, > > thanks for the response. > >> I believe all you need to do is call llvm::llvm_shutdown(). >> > I am not sure that this is what I need. When and how should I call > llvm_shutdown()? At the end of the program, this just arranges f...