search for: monping

...two sets of platforms are disjoint, OpenCL implementers can use my or Devang's noinline-function technique on the optimization-hostile platforms, and inject a unique argument into the barrier() call in the frontend on the no-function platforms. On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: > > Point taken :->.  Inlining of these functions containing these > barriers are required on some platforms.  The only restriction is that > any control flow optimization must preserve the property that all > threads will hit the same barrier. > > --...

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:20 AM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: > > The requirement in OpenCL is that all threads (work-items) are required to > hit the same barrier.  If one does what you have shown below, it is not > legal because some threads may go through the block with S1 and some other > threads will go the other wa...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: >>> In C, integer to point conversions are implementation defined and >>> depends on what the addressing structure of the execution environment >>> is. Given the current definition of ptrtoint and intoptr, I feel that >>> the addressing st...

...e disjoint, OpenCL implementers can use my or Devang's > noinline-function technique on the optimization-hostile platforms, and > inject a unique argument into the barrier() call in the frontend on > the no-function platforms. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> > wrote: >> >> Point taken :->. Inlining of these functions containing these >> barriers are required on some platforms. The only restriction is >> that >> any control flow optimization must preserve the property that all >> threads w...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 13, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: >>>> In C, integer to point conversions are implementation defined and >>>> depends on what the addressing structure of the execution environment >>>> is. Given the current definition of ptrtoint and intoptr, I feel that >>>> t...

...se barriers are required on some platforms. The only restriction is that any control flow optimization must preserve the property that all threads will hit the same barrier. -- Mon Ping On Oct 9, 2009, at 2:22 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:20 AM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> > wrote: >> >> The requirement in OpenCL is that all threads (work-items) are >> required to >> hit the same barrier. If one does what you have shown below, it is >> not >> legal because some threads may go through the block with S1 and...

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: > > Yes, this is the case.   The platforms I'm thinking of don't support > function calls and have the optimization-hostile barrier instructions. > >   -- Mon Ping How about you do two stage inlining for such platforms ? 1. Inline everything except...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: >>> The problem with using ptrtoint and inttoptr is that one has to pick an intermediate integer type that is safe to convert to and from. Since the pointer size is target dependent, it seems unnatural to use ptrtoint and inttoptr for that. >> >> If...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Mon Ping Wang [mailto:monping at apple.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:55 AM > To: Villmow, Micah > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between > address spaces > > > On Sep 12, 2012, at 2:45 PM, "Villmow, Micah" <Micah.V...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange to choose an arbitrary size to convert to and from. Are you making a practical argument that 64b is sufficient on all machines so all targets can use that? In other words, pointers > 64 doesn't mak...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 7:51 AM, "Villmow, Micah" <Micah.Villmow at amd.com> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mon Ping Wang [mailto:monping at apple.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:55 AM >> To: Villmow, Micah >> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between >> address spaces >> >> >> On Sep 12, 2012, at 2:45 PM, "...

On Sep 13, 2012, at 4:55 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 13, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: >>>> The problem with using ptrtoint and inttoptr is that one has to pick an intermediate integer type that is safe to convert to and from. Since the pointer size is target dependent, it seems unnatural to use ptrtoint and inttoptr for that. >>> >...

....com] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 11:53 PM > To: Mon Ping Wang > Cc: Villmow, Micah; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Mailing List > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between > address spaces > > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: > >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange to choose > an arbitrary size to convert to and from. Are you making a practical > argument that 64b is sufficient on all machines so all targets can use > that? In other words, pointers &gt...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Mon P Wang [mailto:monping at apple.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:12 PM > To: Villmow, Micah > Cc: Dan Gohman; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between > address spaces > > Hi, > > On Sep 11, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Villmow, Micah w...

On Sep 12, 2012, at 2:45 PM, "Villmow, Micah" <Micah.Villmow at amd.com> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mon P Wang [mailto:monping at apple.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:12 PM >> To: Villmow, Micah >> Cc: Dan Gohman; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between >> address spaces >> >> Hi, >> >> On Sep 11...

...cah; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Mailing List > > > > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting > > > > > between address spaces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange to > > > > > >>> choose > > > > > an arbitrary size to convert to and from. Are you making a > > > > > practica...

...ect: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for > >> > > > > casting between address spaces > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang > >> > > > > <monping at apple.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange > >> > > > > >>> to choose > >> > > > > an arbitrary size to convert to and from. Are you making...

...iuc.edu Mailing List >> > > > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting >> > > > > between address spaces >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange to >> > > > > >>> choose >> > > > > an arbitrary size to convert to and from. Are you making a >> > &gt...

...apple.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 2:24 PM > To: Villmow, Micah > Cc: Mon Ping Wang; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Mailing List > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New IR instruction for casting between > address spaces > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mon Ping Wang <monping at apple.com> wrote: > >>> In C, integer to point conversions are implementation defined and > >>> depends on what the addressing structure of the execution > environment > >>> is. Given the current definition of ptrtoint and intoptr, I feel > that >...

...roposal: New IR instruction for >> >> > > > > casting between address spaces >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang >> >> > > > > <monping at apple.com> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > > > >>> The pointer size is target dependent so it seems strange >> >> > > > > >>> to choose >> >> > > > > an arbitrary size to convert to and from...