search for: currentgeneration

I've attached a script I wrote that pulls all the setGeneric definitions out of a set of R files and puts them in a separate file, default allGenerics.R. I thought it might help others who find themselves in a similar situation. The "situation" was that I had to change the order in which files in my package were parsed; the scheme in which the generic definition is in the

Hi Brent, I think this is a problem in the easy-cse transform. In this transform load operations can be replaced by their subexpression, in this case the propagated constant, based on the value of the 'CurrentGeneration' of memory writes. This implies that any store operation invalidates the knowledge about previously stored subexpressions. In general, this is a safe assumption but in this case it is missing quite some optimization potential. The effect of this can be shown by moving the line %6 one up, t...

...rdans at tue.nl> wrote: >>> Hi Brent, >>> >>> I think this is a problem in the easy-cse transform. In this transform load >>> operations can be replaced by their subexpression, in this case the >>> propagated constant, based on the value of the 'CurrentGeneration' of memory >>> writes. This implies that any store operation invalidates the knowledge >>> about previously stored subexpressions. >>> >>> In general, this is a safe assumption but in this case it is missing quite >>> some optimization potential. &g...

...Roel Jordans<r.jordans at tue.nl> wrote: >> Hi Brent, >> >> I think this is a problem in the easy-cse transform. In this transform load >> operations can be replaced by their subexpression, in this case the >> propagated constant, based on the value of the 'CurrentGeneration' of memory >> writes. This implies that any store operation invalidates the knowledge >> about previously stored subexpressions. >> >> In general, this is a safe assumption but in this case it is missing quite >> some optimization potential. >> >> The e...

...5, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Roel Jordans <r.jordans at tue.nl> wrote: > Hi Brent, > > I think this is a problem in the easy-cse transform. In this transform load > operations can be replaced by their subexpression, in this case the > propagated constant, based on the value of the 'CurrentGeneration' of memory > writes. This implies that any store operation invalidates the knowledge > about previously stored subexpressions. > > In general, this is a safe assumption but in this case it is missing quite > some optimization potential. > > The effect of this can be shown b...

...wrote: >>>> Hi Brent, >>>> >>>> I think this is a problem in the easy-cse transform. In this transform load >>>> operations can be replaced by their subexpression, in this case the >>>> propagated constant, based on the value of the 'CurrentGeneration' of memory >>>> writes. This implies that any store operation invalidates the knowledge >>>> about previously stored subexpressions. >>>> >>>> In general, this is a safe assumption but in this case it is missing quite >>>> some optimiz...

Hi Roel, the code you list below is precisely what I expect to get (of course the stores must happen but the constant folding should happen as well). It all looks very strange. LLVM is behaving as if the __restrict__ keyword was not used at all. Even more strange is the fact that for this function: double f(double *__restrict__ x, double *__restrict__ y, double *__restrict__ z) { *x = 1.0;