search for: diverging

TL;DR This RFC is a joint effort by Intel and Saarland University to bring the divergence analysis of the Region Vectorizer [1,2,3,4,5] (dubbed the vectorization analysis of RV) to LLVM. The implementation is available on github for feedback [0]. The existing divergence analysis infrastructure in LLVM has conceptual limitations (structured control, SCEV based). The new analysis resolves bugs

Hello, Yes? Where is allActive defined, I couldn't find it. Basically, a BB is control divergent if it's execution depends on a branch that itself depends on a divergent ssa value. On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Zaks, Ayal <ayal.zaks at intel.com> wrote: > What would be the definition of “isControlDivergent(BasicBlock*)”; the > complementary of “allActive(BasicBlock*)” –

Hello, It seems to me that our current DivergenceAnalysis does not save which BasicBlocks may suffer from divergent control. Am I correct? I want to modify our DivergenceAnalysis to add a "bool isControlDivergent(BasicBlock*) const" method and save in the divergence propagator the basicblock that are divergent. I am not sure that is entirely correct, if you have input on that please

On 25.10.2016 16:28, Nicolai Hähnle wrote: > But I fear that this path leads to eternal fuzziness. Let me try a > completely different approach to define what we need by augmenting the > semantics of IR with "divergence tokens". In addition to its usual > value, every IR value carries a "divergence set" of divergence tokens. > > The basic rule is: the

Hi list! I have prepared a custom function (below) in order to calculate separability indices (Divergence, Bhattacharyya, Jeffries-Matusita, Transformed divergene) between two samples of (spectral land cover) classes. I need help to cross-compare results to verify that it works as expected (since I don't know of any other foss-tool that will give me quickly some results). Does anybody

> On Dec 6, 2017, at 02:28, Haidl, Michael <michael.haidl at uni-muenster.de> wrote: > > The IR goes through a backend agnostic preparation phase that brings it into SSA from and changes the AS from 0 to 1. This sounds possibly problematic to me. The IR should be created with the correct address space to begin with. Changing this in the middle sounds suspect. > After this

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 4:15 PM, Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 25.10.2016 01:11, Nicolai Hähnle wrote: >> On 24.10.2016 21:54, Mehdi Amini wrote: >>>> On Oct 24, 2016, at 12:38 PM, Nicolai Hähnle via llvm-dev >>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>>> Some brain-storming on an issue with SPMD/SIMT backend

*Hi, I am considering a language extension to Clang for optimizing GPU programs. This extension will allow the compiler to use different optimization strategies for divergent and non-divergent branches (to be explained below). We have observed significant performance gain by leveraging this proposed extension, so I want to discuss it here to see how the community likes/dislikes the idea. I will

In our experience, as Owen also suggests, a pragma or a language extension can be avoided by a combination of static and dynamic analysis. We prefer this approach in our compiler ;) Regards, Vinod On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com> wrote: > Hi Jingyue, > > Have you considered using dynamic uniformity checks? In my experience you > can

Hi Owen and Vinod, Thanks for sharing the paper! I like the idea a lot. Regarding the paper itself, Vinod, are the consensual branches (e.g., cbranch.ifnone) you mentioned in the paper publicly available in PTX ISA? Owen, could you explain more on the approach of using branch-if-none instructions in your mind? I believe you have lots of great insights, but I don't see how cbranch.ifnone

(I work on CUDA / PTX.) For one thing I'm in favor of having fewer annotations rather than more, so if we can do this in a reasonable way without introducing the notion of co-convergent calls, I think that would be a win. The one convergent annotation is difficult enough for the GPU folks to grok and then keep in cache, and everyone who works on llvm has to pay the cost of keeping their

Hi all, I have some wind data (U and V components) and I would like to compute Vorticity and Divergence of these fields. Is there any R function that can easily do that? Thanks in advance for any help Igor Oliveira CSAG, Dept. Environmental & Geographical Science, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701. Tel.: +27 (0)21 650 5774 South Africa Fax: +27 (0)21

We use Nutch and Lucene for our heavy duty text analysis jobs but I?m trying to use ferrret to do some experiments. I understood that Ferret used the same index format as lucene but I cannot look into a lucene index with ferret and cannot read a ferret index with luke (the lucene index browser). Am I doing somehting wrong or have the formats diverged? -------------- next part -------------- An

On the surface this seems pretty simple, but I flummoxed. I have two sets of numbers they bounce around zero, positive one and negative one. They have a relationship between them, where one diverges away from the other. I want create a second set of numbers that tracks that divergence. #Lets make some data like mine, kinda Firstset <- runif(100, min = -1 , max =1) Secondset <- runif(100,

I am trying to solve an integral in R. However, I am getting an error when I am trying to solve for that integral. The equation that I am trying to solve is as follows: $$ C_m = \frac{{abs{x}}e^{2x}}{\pi^{1/2}}\int_0^t t^{-3/2}e^{-x^2/t-t}dt $$ [image: enter image description here] The code that I am using is as follows: a <- seq(from=-10, by=0.5,length=100) ## Create a function to compute

> On Dec 5, 2017, at 13:53, Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Dec 5, 2017, at 02:51, Haidl, Michael via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi dev list, >> >> I am currently exploring the integration of AMDGPU/ROCm into the PACXX project and observing some

I have R version 2.9.1 on my computer and the anlaysis is not working because I need to update to R version 2.12.0 the latest release. The person incharge of IT tried to download R version 2.12.0 but .exe file referenced in install isn't there - What might we be doing wrong? We have downloaded as tar.gz, uncompress then look for .exe file but not present. Many thanks, Morris

> misc.c provides the ability to override some functions, including the > allocation and printing. fftwrap.c uses speex_alloc, then calls > kiss_fftr_alloc, which calls kiss_fft_alloc, which calls KISS_FFT_MALLOC, > which is defined as malloc in kiss_fft.h. It would make it more consistent > to define KISS_FFT_MALLOC as speex_alloc. That is the only change that I > would

I tried to reduce the test case in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42706. Here it is crashing opt: $ ~/llvm-debug/bin/opt -use-gpu-divergence-analysis -divergence stripped.ll WARNING: You're attempting to print out a bitcode file. This is inadvisable as it may cause display problems. If you REALLY want to taste LLVM bitcode first-hand, you can force output with the `-f' option.

I'm using 7.0. I am attaching the reduced example. nvcc sync.cu -arch=sm_35 -ptx gives // .globl _Z3foov .visible .entry _Z3foov( ) { .reg .pred %p<2>; .reg .s32 %r<3>; mov.u32 %r1, %tid.x; and.b32 %r2, %r1, 1; setp.eq.b32 %p1, %r2, 1; @!%p1 bra BB7_2; bra.uni