Displaying 13 results from an estimated 13 matches for "isfporfpvectorti".
Did you mean:
isfporfpvectorty
2010 Apr 22
0
[LLVMdev] 2.7 release notes
Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes:
> Ok, the LLVM 2.7 release notes are in near final shape. Please take
> a look and suggest improvements (or, better yet, just commit
> improvements if you have commit access):
About the API changes, some that hit me when I ported some code to
LLVM 2.7, and not in the release notes (I had sent a private email
some time ago) :
---
2015 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Handling of undef in the IR
Hi all,
I have a very simple test case (thanks to bugpoint) that hit an assert in reassociate.
(the assert is (C->getType()->isIntOrIntVectorTy() && "Cannot NEG a nonintegral value!"), function getNeg)
The function is taking a Constant as argument, but the assert does not expect an undef. I’m not sure whose responsibility is it to handle that (caller?).
Do we have to
2010 Apr 22
8
[LLVMdev] 2.7 release notes
Ok, the LLVM 2.7 release notes are in near final shape. Please take a look and suggest improvements (or, better yet, just commit improvements if you have commit access):
http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
Things still needed are marked with FIXMEs. These include:
1. Clang needs a blurb describing what's new in 2.7. Have the clang folks been doing anything for the last 6 months?
2. I
2010 Apr 22
1
[LLVMdev] 2.7 release notes
Thanks, I must have missed these, added.
On Apr 22, 2010, at 1:28 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes:
>
>> Ok, the LLVM 2.7 release notes are in near final shape. Please take
>> a look and suggest improvements (or, better yet, just commit
>> improvements if you have commit access):
>
> About the API changes, some that hit
2011 Nov 17
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
On 11/17/2011 12:38 AM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> Tobias, et al.,
>
> Attached is the my autovectorization pass.
Very nice. Will you be at the developer summit? Maybe we could discuss
the integration there?
Here a first review of the source code.
> diff --git a/docs/Passes.html b/docs/Passes.html
> index 5c42f3f..076effa 100644
> --- a/docs/Passes.html
> +++ b/docs/Passes.html
2011 Nov 21
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
Tobias,
I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many
(refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired by your comments.
I'm currently trying to fix the bug responsible for causing a compile
failure when compiling
test-suite/MultiSource/Applications/obsequi/toggle_move.c; after the
pass begins to fuse instructions in a basic block in this file, the
aliasing
2011 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
Tobias, et al.,
Attached is the my autovectorization pass. I've fixed a bug that appears
when using -bb-vectorize-aligned-only, fixed some 80-col violations,
etc., and at least on x86_64, all test cases pass except for a few; and
all of these failures look like instruction-selection bugs. For example:
MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV - fails to compile shared_sha256.c with
an error: error in
2011 Nov 15
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
Tobias,
I've attached the latest version of my autovectorization patch. I was
able to add support for using the ScalarEvolution analysis for
load/store pairing (thanks for your help!). This led to a modest
performance increase and a modest compile-time increase. This version
also has a cutoff as you suggested (although the default value is set
high (4000 instructions between pairs) because
2011 Dec 02
5
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
On 11/23/2011 05:52 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
>>> > > Tobias,
>>> > >
>>> > > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many
>>> > > (refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired
2011 Dec 14
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
Tobias,
I've attached an updated copy of the patch. I believe that I accounted
for all of your suggestions except for:
1. You said that I could make AA a member of the class and initialize it
for each basic block. I suppose that I'd need to make it a pointer, but
more generally, what is the thread-safely model that I should have in
mind for the analysis passes (will multiple threads
2011 Nov 23
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
> > Tobias,
> >
> > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many
> > (refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired by your comments.
> >
> > I'm currently trying to fix the bug responsible for causing a compile
2011 Dec 02
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 17:07 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote:
> On 11/23/2011 05:52 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
> >>> > > Tobias,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes
2011 Nov 22
5
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] BasicBlock Autovectorization Pass
On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote:
> Tobias,
>
> I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many
> (refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired by your comments.
>
> I'm currently trying to fix the bug responsible for causing a compile
> failure when compiling
>