search for: lessprecisefpmadoption

Displaying 13 results from an estimated 13 matches for "lessprecisefpmadoption".

2012 Feb 08
6
[LLVMdev] Clarifying FMA-related TargetOptions
...EE754. Comments specifically reference using hardware FSIN/FCOS on X86. NoExcessFPPrecision - Defaults to off (i.e. excess precision allowed), enables higher-precision implementations than specified by IEEE754. Comments reference FMA-like operations, and X87 without rounding all over the place. LessPreciseFPMADOption - Defaults to off, enables "less precise" FP multiply-add. My general sense is that aggressive FMA formation is beyond the realm of what UnsafeFPMath allows, but I'm unclear on the relationship between NoExcessFPPrecision and LessPreciseFPMADOption. My understanding is that fused mu...
2012 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] Clarifying FMA-related TargetOptions
...EE754. Comments specifically reference using hardware FSIN/FCOS on X86. NoExcessFPPrecision - Defaults to off (i.e. excess precision allowed), enables higher-precision implementations than specified by IEEE754. Comments reference FMA-like operations, and X87 without rounding all over the place. LessPreciseFPMADOption - Defaults to off, enables "less precise" FP multiply-add. My general sense is that aggressive FMA formation is beyond the realm of what UnsafeFPMath allows, but I'm unclear on the relationship between NoExcessFPPrecision and LessPreciseFPMADOption. My understanding is that fused mu...
2013 Jul 25
2
[LLVMdev] Clang/LLVM 3.3 unwanted attributes being added: NoFramePointerElim
...options. I've tracked the code to: NoFramePointerElim I've seen the description of: ./lib/Target/TargetMachine.cpp RESET_OPTION(NoFramePointerElim, "no-frame-pointer-elim"); RESET_OPTION(NoFramePointerElimNonLeaf, "no-frame-pointer-elim-non-leaf"); RESET_OPTION(LessPreciseFPMADOption, "less-precise-fpmad"); RESET_OPTION(UnsafeFPMath, "unsafe-fp-math"); RESET_OPTION(NoInfsFPMath, "no-infs-fp-math"); RESET_OPTION(NoNaNsFPMath, "no-nans-fp-math"); RESET_OPTION(UseSoftFloat, "use-soft-float"); RESET_OPTION(DisableTailCalls...
2013 Jul 18
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.3 JIT code speed
...CodeGenOpt::Aggressive); builder.setEngineKind(EngineKind::JIT); builder.setUseMCJIT(true); builder.setCodeModel(CodeModel::JITDefault); builder.setMCPU(llvm::sys::getHostCPUName()); TargetOptions targetOptions; targetOptions.NoFramePointerElim = true; targetOptions.LessPreciseFPMADOption = true; targetOptions.UnsafeFPMath = true; targetOptions.NoInfsFPMath = true; targetOptions.NoNaNsFPMath = true; targetOptions.GuaranteedTailCallOpt = true; builder.setTargetOptions(targetOptions); TargetMachine* tm = builder.selectTarget(); fJIT = builder.crea...
2012 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] Clarifying FMA-related TargetOptions
...re > FSIN/FCOS on X86. > > > NoExcessFPPrecision - Defaults to off (i.e. excess precision allowed), > enables higher-precision implementations than specified by IEEE754. > Comments reference FMA-like operations, and X87 without rounding all > over the place. > > > LessPreciseFPMADOption - Defaults to off, enables "less precise" FP > multiply-add. > > > My general sense is that aggressive FMA formation is beyond the realm > of what UnsafeFPMath allows, but I'm unclear on the relationship > between NoExcessFPPrecision and LessPreciseFPMADOption. My...
2012 Feb 08
1
[LLVMdev] Clarifying FMA-related TargetOptions
...mparisons such as: a * b + c - d. If c == d, it is still possible for that result not to equal a*b, as "+c " will have been fused with the multiply whereas "- d" won't. I agree that !NoExcessFPPrecision seems like it should cover FMA, but if that that is the case, what does LessPreciseFPMADOption cover? --Owen
2013 Jul 18
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.3 JIT code speed
...uilder.setEngineKind(EngineKind::JIT); > builder.setUseMCJIT(true); > builder.setCodeModel(CodeModel::JITDefault); > builder.setMCPU(llvm::sys::getHostCPUName()); > > TargetOptions targetOptions; > targetOptions.NoFramePointerElim = true; > targetOptions.LessPreciseFPMADOption = true; > targetOptions.UnsafeFPMath = true; > targetOptions.NoInfsFPMath = true; > targetOptions.NoNaNsFPMath = true; > targetOptions.GuaranteedTailCallOpt = true; > > builder.setTargetOptions(targetOptions); > > TargetMachine* tm = builder.selectTarg...
2013 Jul 18
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.3 JIT code speed
...gineKind::JIT); >> builder.setUseMCJIT(true); >> builder.setCodeModel(CodeModel::JITDefault); >> builder.setMCPU(llvm::sys::getHostCPUName()); >> >> TargetOptions targetOptions; >> targetOptions.NoFramePointerElim = true; >> targetOptions.LessPreciseFPMADOption = true; >> targetOptions.UnsafeFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.NoInfsFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.NoNaNsFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.GuaranteedTailCallOpt = true; >> >> builder.setTargetOptions(targetOptions); >> >> TargetMach...
2013 Jul 18
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.3 JIT code speed
...gineKind::JIT); >> builder.setUseMCJIT(true); >> builder.setCodeModel(CodeModel::JITDefault); >> builder.setMCPU(llvm::sys::getHostCPUName()); >> >> TargetOptions targetOptions; >> targetOptions.NoFramePointerElim = true; >> targetOptions.LessPreciseFPMADOption = true; >> targetOptions.UnsafeFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.NoInfsFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.NoNaNsFPMath = true; >> targetOptions.GuaranteedTailCallOpt = true; >> >> builder.setTargetOptions(targetOptions); >> >> TargetMach...
2016 Nov 18
2
what does -ffp-contract=fast allow?
...the > possibility of adding FMA bits to FMF (as well as storing all FMF in > metadata) was discussed here: > https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13118 > 3. The backend needs a thread of its own. We have at least these > mechanisms to handle FMA codegen: > a. TargetOptions for LessPreciseFPMADOption, UnsafeFPMath, > NoInfsFPMath, NoNaNsFPMath, AllowFPOpFusion (Fast, Standard, Strict) > b. SDNodeFlags for UnsafeAlgebra, NoNaNs, NoInfs, NoSignedZeros (but > nothing for FMA since IR FMF has nothing for FMA) > c. SelectionDAGTargetInfo::generateFMAsInMachineCombiner() > d. Target...
2016 Nov 18
2
what does -ffp-contract=fast allow?
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Nov 17, 2016 5:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com<mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > > >> On Nov 17, 2016, at 4:33 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov<mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote: >> >> >> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: "Warren
2014 Sep 19
2
[LLVMdev] More careful treatment of floating point exceptions
Hi Sanjay, Thanks, I saw this flag and it's definitely should be considered, but it appeared to me to be static characteristic of target platform. I'm not sure how appropriate it would be to change its value from a front-end. It says "Has", while optional flag would rather say "Uses" meaning that implementation cares about floating point exceptions. Regards, Sergey
2014 Sep 25
2
[LLVMdev] More careful treatment of floating point exceptions
...t/TargetOptions.h b/include/llvm/Target/TargetOptions.h index f7df921..e20fc36 100644 --- a/include/llvm/Target/TargetOptions.h +++ b/include/llvm/Target/TargetOptions.h @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ namespace llvm { TargetOptions() : PrintMachineCode(false), NoFramePointerElim(false), LessPreciseFPMADOption(false), UnsafeFPMath(false), - NoInfsFPMath(false), NoNaNsFPMath(false), + NoInfsFPMath(false), NoNaNsFPMath(false), HonorFPExceptions(false), HonorSignDependentRoundingFPMathOption(false), UseSoftFloat(false), NoZerosInBSS(false), JITEmitDebugInfo(false),...