search for: conditionalised

...rote: > In general, this is true everywhere. In a large vectorized loop, this cost > may well be worthwhile. The idea is that the cost model should account for > all of these costs. If it doesn't properly, we should fix that. Isn't this only worth when the SIMD instructions can be conditionalised per lane? I believe AVX512 and SVE have such abilities, but not NEON or SSE. Does SystemZ support conditionalisation in SIMD? cheers, --renato

Hi all, It’s been two weeks since I sent the last merge progress email, so here is an update. TL;DR: Almost done! Tim is considering suggesting making the final switchover sometime next week. This would be the final push, where AArch64 gets deleted and ARM64 gets renamed to AArch64, and would signal the end of the merge process. If any of you know of any reason why these two loving

Hi, Looking at bugzilla PR11087, I'd like to conditionalise a transformation in ARMIselLowering.cpp based on whether we're compiling for codesize or performance. -Os doesn't actually exist for llc, and I can't see an obvious place where that condition would be set. Where do we specify if we're optimizing for codesize or performance? Cheers, James --------------

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 7:58 AM, James Molloy <james.molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > > Looking at bugzilla PR11087, I’d like to conditionalise a transformation in > ARMIselLowering.cpp based on whether we’re compiling for codesize or > performance. > > > > -Os doesn’t actually exist for llc, and I can’t see an obvious place where > that condition

Hi, it seems to be generally a bad idea to enable vectorization of conditional stores on SystemZ, because it will cost extra instructions both to 1. extract compare result element 2. Do a test-under-mask instruction on that element 3. conditional branch past the store block. Ideally, I would like to adjust the cost for the vector compare. I am not sure if this is feasable since I would need

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631 dtucker at zip.com.au changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |patch ------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au 2003-10-07 18:23 ------- Is that specfile patch OK or is there a better

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 10:37:37PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > Say I have a bunch of values which I want to filter a query against. > If I had boolean terms, it could just OP_OR against the whole set. > IOW, this is what notmuch does with terms: > > std::set<std::string> terms; > > // notmuch populates terms via terms.insert(*i)... > > Query(OP_OR,

I probably should've used boolean terms in addition to numeric values when indexing, but currently I have a set of numeric values[1] and trying to avoid having to reindex ~250GB DBs (and asking numerous users to do the same). Say I have a bunch of values which I want to filter a query against. If I had boolean terms, it could just OP_OR against the whole set. IOW, this is what notmuch does

See http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/devel/297170 for some information on how to get this going. I''ve rebased and addressed the review comments. As before several of the patches are not to be applied because they can be done better using infrastructure from Julien''s "Allow Xen to boot with a raw Device Tree" patch. They are included for completeness. With

I just had a memory crash with R-0.64.1. I am running under intel pentium 200mhz under slackware linux 2.0.30. 1/home/plindsey >gdb /usr/local/src/R/bin/R.binary core GDB is free software and you are welcome to distribute copies of it under certain conditions; type "show copying" to see the conditions. There is absolutely no warranty for GDB; type "show warranty" for

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2478 Bug ID: 2478 Summary: Escape sequences (starting with ~) don't work when remote shell is BusyBox ash Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 7.1p1 Hardware: ix86 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5

See http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/devel/297170 for some information on how to get this going. I''ve rebased and addressed the review comments. With this rebase I''ve picked up some patches from Julien which were required to do things properly, so the gic v7 and device blacklisting patches have been changed to use the proper mechanisms. Previously I was able to boot

Proposal for extending the Loop Vectorizer to handle Outer Loops ================================================================ Goal: ----- We propose to extend the innermost Loop Vectorizer to also handle outerloops (cf.[1]). Our aim is to best leverage the efforts already invested in the existing innermost Loop Vectorizer rather than introduce a separate pass dedicated to outerloop