search for: costs

Sorry if double posted... might have sent this to old mailing list address... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Stephen Thomas <stephen.warner.thomas at gmail.com> Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:39 AM Subject: How to use CostModel? To: LLVM Dev <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Hi, I'm trying to use the built-in CostModel class to estimate the number of machine instructions

Hello! I am trying to get a logic estatement in R using the if function, but it is all the time comming and error, I have tryied different methods but nothing is working the sentence is the following: dispersal[1] <- if (any (relativenes[1] < cost)) ((relativenes[1]- cost)/(relativenes[1]- cost*cost)) else 0 for (i in 2: time){ dispersal[i] <- if (any

...nknown, where the user is simply unable to determine an accurate cost for an operation. This new wrapper class would work almost seamlessly with existing code as it would contain the full set of operators required for arithmetic and comparisons. This is in addition to the ability to create invalid costs and query the validity of an existing cost. Once a cost becomes invalid or unknown it will remain in that state regardless of any further arithmetic performed. Kind Regards, David Sherwood. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/p...

...with given/when/then (GWT) with a strategy pattern follows: Consider a pipeline transporting oil supplied by multiple partners. The amounts transported on behalf of each partner are recorded as transactions in a general ledger. There are multiple approaches to allocating the pipeline operational costs to each partner: - fixed amount - equal split - fixed percentage - gross override with subsidiary cost allocation - proportional cost allocation - tiered cost allocation The fixed amount, equal split, and fixed percentage methods were easy to specify since all logic is contained within...

...arithmetic operation? It won't be perfect, but it adds a bit more information at very reduced price. Though, this would require us to pass the Instruction, not the Opcode. Do you have an example where this happening? The example below is not stopping the vectorizer, but it does add a lot of costs where there are none... ** C code: int direct (int k) { int i; int a[256], b[256], c[256]; for (i=0; i<256; i++){ a[i] = b[i] * c[i]; } return a[k]; } ** ASM vectorized result: adr r5, .LCPI0_0 vdup.32 q9, r1 vld1.64 {d16, d17}, [r5, :128]...

Thanks Nadav for the info. It clears my query :) Yes its an integer ADD, and since AVX2 supports 256 bits integer arithmetic, so its cost is less than AVX1. One query though - shouldn't then the cost of integer ADD/SUB/MUL (which would be 1) be explicitly specified in AVX2 cost table? Because right now this entry is missing and cost of these operations are taken from BaseTTI (which is

...1 For instruction: %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv.next to i32 LV: Found an estimated cost of 1 for VF 1 For instruction: %exitcond = icmp ne i32 %lftr.wideiv, 256 LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 1 For instruction: br i1 %exitcond, label %for.body, label %for.end LV: Scalar loop costs: 6. LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 2 For instruction: %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body ] LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 2 For instruction: %arrayidx = getelementptr inbounds [256 x i32]* @b, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv LV: Found an estimated cost o...

Hi all, I have a query regarding Cost Table for AVX2 in TargetTransformInfo. The table consist of entries for shift and div operations only. There are no entries for ADD, SUB and MUL for AVX2 cost table. Those entries are present in Cost Table for AVX. The reason for query is - when my sub target feature is AVX2, in SLP Vectorization, while calculating scalar cost of ADD, it doesn't see

...es 4 3.3 Proposed Service Commencement Date 4 4.0 IMPUTATION TEST 4 5.0 DEMAND AND REVENUE INFORMATION 5 5.1 Forecast Assumptions and Methodology 5 5.2 Number of Customers 5 5.3 Number of 0-ECRS Calls 5 5.4 Bell Canada Average 0-ECRS Call Duration 5 5.5 Estimates of Demand Quantities 5 6.0 PHASE II COSTS 6 6.1 Study Assumptions 6 6.2 Study Period 7 6.3 Financial Parameters and Tax Rates 7 6.4 Cost Inclusions 7 6.4.1 Expenses Causal to the Service 7 6.4.2 Capital Causal to the Service 8 6.4.3 Capital Causal to Demand 8 6.4.4 Expenses Causal to Demand 8 6.4.5 Phase II Cost Summary 9 7.0 3RD PARTY ACQ...

<Copied Cong> Thanks Elena. Mostly I was interested in why such a high cost 30 kept for TRUNCATE v16i32 to v16i8 in SSE41. Looking at the code it appears like TRUNCATE v16i32 to v16i8 in SSE41 is very expensive vs SSE2. I feel this number should be same/close to the cost mentioned for same operation in SSE2ConversionTbl. Below patch from Cong Hou reduce cost for same operation in SSE2

...t" on either side results in an invalid cost (similar to how NaN infects floats), and an implicit conversion that constructs a valid cost. Then I could just do: ``` Cost c = 7; // c is a valid cost of 7 here c = c + someFuncThatReturnsInvalidCost(); Cost d = 2 + c; // d and c are both invalid costs here ``` This way, basically no existing code has to change. I'm actually a little disappointed that llvm::Optional doesn't already have this behavior (with arithmetic operators guarded by enable_if). Thanks, Christopher Tetreault From: David Sherwood <David.Sherwood at arm.com>...

I try to track down an error that causes that Astcc just reports the time, but not the costs. I could narrow the problem down into this sub routine: sub calccost() { my ($adjconn, $adjcost, $answeredtime, $increment) = @_; eval { my $adjtime = int(($answeredtime + $increment - 1) / $increment) * $increment }; my $cost; print STDERR "Adjusted time is $adjtime, cost is $adjcost...

All, I have a question regarding colors in bar plots. I want to stack a total of 18 cost values in each bar. Basically, it is six cost types and each cost type has three components- direct, indirect, and induced costs. I would like to use both solid color bars and bars with the slanted lines (using the density parameter). The colors would distinguish cost types and the lines would distinguish direct/indirect/induced. I want the cost types (i.e. colors) to be stacked together for each cost type. In other word...

...le can comment on it? Regards, David Sherwood. From: Chris Tetreault <ctetreau at quicinc.com> Sent: 05 November 2020 19:23 To: David Sherwood <David.Sherwood at arm.com>; LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: RE: [llvm-dev] [Proposal] Introducing the concept of invalid costs to the IR cost model You're being quite vague about what the extra state is. Is this because you haven't yet settled on what it should be, or do you actually intend to let it be a template parameter: template <typename T> struct Cost { unsigned Val; T State; } Thanks, Christ...

It might also make sense to have functions that return costs for vector ops return some sort of `LinearPolyBase` with `ScalarTy` being `InstructionCost`. From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Vineet Kumar via llvm-dev Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 11:24 PM To: David Sherwood <David.Sherwood at arm.com>; llvm-dev at l...

...finite cost) solution for PBQP problem."' failed. The problem is that node 5 is being allocated an infinite cost option (which implies that all its options have infinite cost). The following steps lead to this situation: -> Applying R2 to 5 Node 5 is pushed to the reduction stack and costs are pushed onto edge (0, 4), ensuring that neither Node 0 nor Node 4 can be stored in a register. -> Applying RN (unsafe) to 0 safe = { }, unsafe = { 0 6 4 7 8 } Node 0 is pushed to the reduction stack and all of its edges are removed, including (0,4), throwing away the restriction that 4 must...

...atch is an NFC to help address the issue of ambiguity, I have uploaded the patch here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002. It's a biggy, adding TargetCostKind as an argument to almost all the get*Cost methods. My hope is that, as well as clarity, it will allow some backends to re-use and correlate costs if they wish. It would also allow adding a hook to query the backend which cost kind is the most important to it, which could then be passed around. But as the patch currently stands, even as an NFC, it could still lead users astray because nothing else is setup to differentiate and return a speci...

On 2017-01-20 14:31, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On 01/20/2017 06:11 AM, Jonas Paulsson via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I wonder why getScalarizationOverhead() does not take into account >> the number of operands of the instruction? This should influence the >> number of extracts needed, so instead of >> >> Scalarization cost = NumEls * (insert +

...%4 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv.next to i32, !dbg !52 LV: Found an estimated cost of 1 for VF 1 For instruction: %cmp = icmp slt i32 %4, %1, !dbg !52 LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 1 For instruction: br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end.loopexit, !dbg !52, !prof !57 LV: Scalar loop costs: 5. LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 2 For instruction: %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body ] LV: Found an estimated cost of 0 for VF 2 For instruction: %state = getelementptr inbounds %struct.quantum_reg_node_struct* %2, i64 %indvars.iv, i32 1, !dbg...

Hi, I was going through the X86TTIImpl::getCastInstrCost, and got a doubt on cost calculation for TRUNCATE instruction in AVX mode. In AVX2ConversionTbl & AVXConversionTbl table there is no cost defined for TRUNCATE v16i32 to v16i8, as a fallback it goes to SSE41ConversionTbl table and there it finds cost as 30 for this operation. 30 cost for this operation looks very high. Wondering why