search for: i0

...{ x[ 4] ^= R(x[ 0]+x[12], 7); x[ 8] ^= R(x[ 4]+x[ 0], 9); x[12] ^= R(x[ 8]+x[ 4],13); x[ 0] ^= R(x[12]+x[ 8],18); .... x[14] ^= R(x[13]+x[12],13); x[15] ^= R(x[14]+x[13],18); } which would be translated into a serial of affine functions: ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[12] }; ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; MustWriteAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[0] }; ... Consequently, the PollyDependence pass would produce very complex...

...x[ 8] ^= R(x[ 4]+x[ 0], 9); > x[12] ^= R(x[ 8]+x[ 4],13); x[ 0] ^= R(x[12]+x[ 8],18); > .... > x[14] ^= R(x[13]+x[12],13); x[15] ^= R(x[14]+x[13],18); > } > which would be translated into a serial of affine functions: > ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[12] }; > ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; > MustWriteAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; > ReadAccess := { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[0] }; > ... > Consequently, the PollyDependence pas...

...9); >>      x[12] ^= R(x[ 8]+x[ 4],13);  x[ 0] ^= R(x[12]+x[ 8],18); >>      .... >>      x[14] ^= R(x[13]+x[12],13);  x[15] ^= R(x[14]+x[13],18); >>    } >> which would be translated into a serial of affine functions: >>        ReadAccess :=    { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[12] }; >>        ReadAccess :=    { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; >>        MustWriteAccess :=    { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[4] }; >>        ReadAccess :=    { Stmt_for_body5[i0] -> MemRef_x[0] }; >>        ... >> Consequently, the...

...E_NEVER 0x00000000 -#define NV50_2D_COND_MODE_ALWAYS 0x00000001 +#define NV50_2D_COND_MODE_ALWAYS 0x00000001 #define NV50_2D_COND_MODE_RES_NON_ZERO 0x00000002 #define NV50_2D_COND_MODE_EQUAL 0x00000003 #define NV50_2D_COND_MODE_NOT_EQUAL 0x00000004 +#define NVC0_2D_UNK0270(i0) (0x00000270 + 0x4*(i0)) +#define NVC0_2D_UNK0270__ESIZE 0x00000004 +#define NVC0_2D_UNK0270__LEN 0x00000004 + #define NV50_2D_CLIP_X 0x00000280 #define NV50_2D_CLIP_Y 0x00000284 @@ -158,7 +168,7 @@ WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. #...

...e NVC0_2D_PATTERN_COLOR_FORMAT_UNK4 0x00000004 -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_COLOR_FORMAT_UNK5 0x00000005 - -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_MONO_FORMAT 0x000002ec -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_MONO_FORMAT_CGA6 0x00000000 -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_MONO_FORMAT_LE 0x00000001 - -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_COLOR(i0) (0x000002f0 + 0x4*(i0)) -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_COLOR__ESIZE 0x00000004 -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_COLOR__LEN 0x00000002 - -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_BITMAP(i0) (0x000002f8 + 0x4*(i0)) -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_BITMAP__ESIZE 0x00000004 -#define NVC0_2D_PATTERN_BITMAP__LEN...

...C0_3D_TESS_MODE_SPACING_EQUAL 0x00000000 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_MODE_SPACING_FRACTIONAL_ODD 0x00000010 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_MODE_SPACING_FRACTIONAL_EVEN 0x00000020 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_MODE_CW 0x00000100 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_MODE_CONNECTED 0x00000200 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_OUTER(i0) (0x00000324 + 0x4*(i0)) -#define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_OUTER__ESIZE 0x00000004 +#define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_OUTER__ESIZE 0x00000004 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_OUTER__LEN 0x00000004 #define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_INNER(i0) (0x00000334 + 0x4*(i0)) -#define NVC0_3D_TESS_LEVEL_IN...

On 08/16/2013 02:42 AM, Star Tan wrote: > At 2013-08-16 12:44:02,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I tried to reproduce your findings, but could not do so. > > > Sorry, I did not put all code in my previous email because the code seems a little too long and complicated. > You can refer to the detailed C code and LLVM IR

...ways, we skip the "base" value when compare parameters. > With this patch file, the Scop becomes: > > Context: > p0: {0,+,128}<%for.cond2.preheader> > Statements { > Stmt_for_body6 > Domain := > { Stmt_for_body6[i0] : i0 >= 0 and i0 <= 7 }; > Scattering := > { Stmt_for_body6[i0] -> scattering[0, i0, 0] }; > ReadAccess := > [p_0] -> { Stmt_for_body6[i0] -> MemRef_input[o0] : 2o0 = p_0 + 16i0 }; > ReadAccess :...

On 07/29/2013 09:15 AM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 07:37:14AM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 07/29/2013 03:18 AM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 04:42:25PM -0700, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>>> Sven: In terms of making the behaviour of isl easier to understand, >>>> it may make sense to fail/assert in case

Under certain circumstances, my compiler outputs basic blocks having the same function: bb_97: ; preds = %bb_1 %476 = getelementptr inbounds %LMtop.I0.ARType, %LMtop.I0.ARType* %0, i64 0, i32 6 %477 = bitcast i8** %476 to %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType** %478 = load %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType*, %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType** %477, align 8 %479 = getelementptr inbounds %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType, %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType* %478, i64 0, i32 3 %480 = bitcast i8** %4...

...<= 9223372036854775807 and p_2 >= -9223372036854775808 and p_2 <= 9223372036854775807 } p0: {0,+,128}<%for.cond2.preheader> p1: {2,+,128}<%for.cond2.preheader> p2: {4,+,128}<%for.cond2.preheader> Statements { Stmt_for_body6 Domain := [p_0, p_1, p_2] -> { Stmt_for_body6[i0] : i0 >= 0 and i0 <= 7 }; Scattering := [p_0, p_1, p_2] -> { Stmt_for_body6[i0] -> scattering[0, i0, 0] }; ReadAccess := [p_0, p_1, p_2] -> { Stmt_for_body6[i0] -> MemRef_input[o0] : 2o0 = p_0 + 16i0 }; ReadAccess := [p_0, p_1, p_2] -> { Stmt_for_body6[i0] -> MemRef_input[o0...

Hi Sebastian, Recently, I found the "Polly - Calculate dependences" pass would lead to significant compile-time overhead when compiling some loop-intensive source code. Tobias told me you found similar problem as follows: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14240 My evaluation shows that "Polly - Calculate dependences" pass consumes 96.4% of total compile-time overhead

...preheader => for.end32' in function 'main': Context: [cond.reload] -> { : cond.reload >= -2147483648 and cond.reload <= 2147483647 } p0: %cond.reload Statements { Stmt_for_body16 Domain := [cond.reload] -> { Stmt_for_body16[i0, i1, i2, i3, i4, i5] : i0 >= 0 and i0 <= -1 + cond.reload and i1 >= 0 and i1 <= -1 + cond.reload and i2 >= 0 and i2 <= -1 + cond.reload and i3 >= 0 and i3 <= -1 + cond.reload and i4 >= 0 and i4 <= -1 + cond.reload and i5 >= 0 and i5 <= -1 + cond.reload and cond.r...

...llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Under certain circumstances, my compiler outputs basic blocks having the same function: > > > > bb_97: ; preds = %bb_1 > > %476 = getelementptr inbounds %LMtop.I0.ARType, %LMtop.I0.ARType* %0, i64 0, i32 6 > > %477 = bitcast i8** %476 to %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType** > > %478 = load %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType*, %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType** %477, align 8 > > %479 = getelementptr inbounds %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType, %LBstd.Cprocess.CRType* %478, i64 0,...

At 2013-08-16 12:44:02,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >Hi, > >I tried to reproduce your findings, but could not do so. Sorry, I did not put all code in my previous email because the code seems a little too long and complicated. You can refer to the detailed C code and LLVM IR code on http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16843 There are four attachments

...j < Upper Bound2; j++) for (int k = 0; k < Upper Bound3; j++) C[i][j] += A[i][k] * B[k][j] We could probably check that memory access relations have the following form: "accesses" : [ { "kind" : "read", "relation" : "{ Stmt_14[i0, i1, i2] -> MemRef_1[i0, i2] }" }, { "kind" : "read", "relation" : "{ Stmt_14[i0, i1, i2] -> MemRef_2[i2, i1] }" }, { "kind" : "read", "relation" : "{ Stmt_14[i0, i1, i2] -> MemRef_3[i0,...

...ptrValue = 47248855040 offset = 40, ptrValue = 47246749696 offset = 48, ptrValue = 47247802368 offset = 16, value = 64 offset = 20, value = 64 offset = 24, value = 64 MemoryAccess to pointer: float* inttoptr (i64 47246749696 to float*) { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> MemRef_nttoptr (i64 47246749696 to float*)[4096i0 + 64i1 + i2] } allocSize: 4 storeSize: 4 replacedBy: { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> NULL[o0] : o0 >= 47246749696 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47246749699 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 } MemoryAccess to pointer:...

...mp: [branch trunk] 302339 > Blamelist: meinersbur Hi Michael, the recent commit caused a failure: /home/grosser/buildslave/polly-amd64-linux/llvm.src/tools/polly/test/DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll:102:16: error: expected string not found in input ; APPROX-NEXT: new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : i0 <= 3 and 0 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 }; ^ <stdin>:62:2: note: scanning from here new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : 2 <= i0 <= 3 and 0 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 }; I have no idea where it comes from. On my machine (and my ear...

...at.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2023-November/478619.html Dear Kornad, I think I have started to understand what you try to achieve. The problem is to fit a NLE and compute the parameters of the NL-Eq. I have included the R Help-list back in the loop, as I am not an expert in optimization. Goal: y ~ I0 + IHD * hd + ID * d; where: y = given vector of measurements; x = given vector of values; I0, IHD, ID, kd = parameters to optimize; hd = satisfies a polynomial of order 3; As d = d0 - hd, the previous formula can be written: y ~ I0 + ID * d0 + (IHD - ID) * hd; f(x, hd, kd) = 0, where f = a poly...

On 01/01/2013 02:45 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > >> >> In our compiler we use a modified version LLVM Polly, which is very >> sensitive to >> proper code generation. Among the number of limitations, the loop region >> (enclosed by phi node on induction variable and branch) is required to >> be free >> of additional memory-dependent