search for: dependeces

...%11* * store i32 %10, i32* %12, align 4* * br label %13* *; <label>:13: ; preds = %7* * %14 = add i32 %.0, 1* * br label %4* *; <label>:15: ; preds = %4* * ret void* *}* Can you please check whether the anti dependeces that you get are loop-carried or loop-independent? Thanks, - Stan On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stan, > > can you share your example.bc? Can you reproduce your issue with llvm 4.0 > or, better even, trunk? > > Che...

Jason, > If I understand your interpretation of streams, it does not match my > understanding. SE follows the CUDA meaning of "stream". I think of a stream > as a "work queue" and each device can have several active streams. Memory > space on the device does not belong to any stream, so any stream can access > it. The thing that does belong to the stream is the

I have been having problems with these two 'libraries' since I installed 2.0.0. I have built a package with couple of functions so that I can load it at startup every time R is booted. The problem is that I have the following error every time I call the library Loading required package: tclk Error: package 'tclk' could not be loaded In addition: Warning message: There is no

Hi Philip, Thanks for checking! I'm running my own Foo pass that registers DependenceAnalysisWrapperPass as a prerequisite and then I run it like so: opt -load libfoo.so -foo example.bc This is LLVM 3.9. Cheers, - Stan On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stan, > > in both cases I get a consistent anti result. Can you

Hi Sergos, Am I got it right, that SE interfaces are bound to the stream that is passed as argument? As I can see the stream is an abstraction of the target - hence data transfers for particular stream is limited to this stream? As for libomptarget implementation the data once offloaded can be reused in all offload entries, without additional data transfer. Is it possible in SE approach? If I

Sure I will split it and put it in two patches. Give me few hours. I need to test those patches. Sirish On 4/19/2012 8:40 AM, Tom Stellard wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:18:05PM -0500, Sirish Pande wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Here's a patch for Hexagon Packetizer for review. This patch does >> not yield any warnings. >> > Would it be possible to split this