search for: ptx22

...uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-March/038654.html In my PTX.td patch, def FeaturePTX23 : SubtargetFeature<"ptx23", "PTXVersion", PTX_VERSION_2_3", "Use PTX Language Version 2.3", [FeaturePTX22]>; I can only guess above statement means PTX23 is fully compatible with PTX22. Is my guess right? If so, how can one express that FeatureA is NOT fully compatible with FeatureB in .td? Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia...

...CodeGen/PTX/options.ll (revision 130978) +++ test/CodeGen/PTX/options.ll (working copy) @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=ptx20 | grep ".version 2.0" ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=ptx21 | grep ".version 2.1" ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=ptx22 | grep ".version 2.2" +; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=ptx23 | grep ".version 2.3" ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=sm10 | grep ".target sm_10" ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32 -mattr=sm13 | grep ".target sm_13" ; RUN: llc < %s -march=ptx32...

...> > This is the testcase that I am using to verify I the max builtin > > function I am impementing > > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm-intrinsic.ll > test case. > > The command I am using to compile is: > > > > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > > > > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same outcome. > > I am using llvm from the svn repository. > > > > Bye, > > > > Alberto > > > >>>> > &g...

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 5:37 AM, 陳韋任 <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > Hi, Justin > > PTX version in CUDA 4.0 has changed from 2.2 to 2.3. > I add ptx23 subtarget and update a testcase. > > Is that O.K.? > Looks good. Committed in r130980. Thanks! In the future, patches should be sent to llvm-commits instead of llvmdev. > > Regards, > chenwj >

...-March/038654.html > > In my PTX.td patch, > > def FeaturePTX23 : SubtargetFeature<"ptx23", "PTXVersion", > PTX_VERSION_2_3", > "Use PTX Language Version 2.3", > [FeaturePTX22]>; > > I can only guess above statement means PTX23 is fully compatible with > PTX22. Is my guess right? If so, how can one express that FeatureA is > NOT fully compatible with FeatureB in .td? > Literally, it means any feature supported by PTX 2.2 is also supported by PTX 2.3....

...e that I am using to verify I the max builtin >> > function I am impementing >> > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm-intrinsic.ll >> > test case. >> > The command I am using to compile is: >> > >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll >> > >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same outcome. >> > I am using llvm from the svn repository. >> > >> > Bye, >> > >> > Alberto >&gt...

...the max builtin > >> > function I am impementing > >> > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm-intrinsic.ll > >> > test case. > >> > The command I am using to compile is: > >> > > >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > >> > > >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same outcome. > >> > I am using llvm from the svn repository. > >> > > >> > Bye, > >>...

...br i1 %3, label %then, label %else then: ; preds = %entry ret i32 1 else: ; preds = %entry ret i32 2 } Run like this: llvm-as test.ll -o test.bc llc -march=ptx -relocation-model=pic -mattr=sm20 -mattr=ptx22 -mattr=64bit -mattr=double test.bc -o test.ptx My first question would be why does it evaluate the entry basicblock twice (BB#0, BB#3), is this to do with predicated branching? If I run this through llc with the -debug=1 flag (or by viewing the graphs), I get this in the initial selection dag:...

...>> > function I am impementing >> >> > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm-intrinsic.ll >> >> > test case. >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: >> >> > >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll >> >> > >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same outcome. >> >> > I am using llvm from the svn repository. >> >> > >> >>...

...pementing > >> >> > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm- > intrinsic.ll > >> >> > test case. > >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: > >> >> > > >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > >> >> > > >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same > outcome. > >> >> > I am using llvm from the svn repository. > >> &...

...ally recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm- > >> intrinsic.ll > >> >> >> > test case. > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same > >> outcome. > >> >> >> > I am using...

Dear Justin, I am trying to add the support for some OpenCL builtin functions to the PTX backend. The attached file represent the first stub of a patch for the fmax builtin function. The test case I am trying is the following: define ptx_device float @f(float %x, float %y) { entry: %z = call float @fmax(float %x, float %y) ret float %z } declare float @fmax(float, float) But at the moment

...gt; >> > is actually recognised. I took inspiration from the llvm- >> intrinsic.ll >> >> >> > test case. >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same >> outcome. >> >> >> > I am using llvm from the svn reposit...

...nspiration from the llvm- > > >> intrinsic.ll > > >> >> >> > test case. > > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same > > >> outcome. > > >> >>...

...llvm- >> > >> intrinsic.ll >> > >> >> >> > test case. >> > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. >> > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same >> > >> outcome. >> &gt...

...llvm- >> > >> intrinsic.ll >> > >> >> >> > test case. >> > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. >> > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same >> > >> outcome. >> &gt...

...>> intrinsic.ll > >> > >> >> >> > test case. > >> > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > >> > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same > >> > >> o...

...>> intrinsic.ll > >> > >> >> >> > test case. > >> > >> >> >> > The command I am using to compile is: > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > llc -march=ptx32 -mattr=+ptx22 fmax.ll > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > The option -mattr does not seem to have any effect. > >> > >> >> >> > I tried also with the ptx_device qualifier with the same > >> > >> o...