search for: r172894

...; single instruction (details below). > In a matrix-matrix inner-kernel, I see a ~25% decrease in performance, which > seems to be due to this. > > Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! This was intentional; apparently doing it with two instructions is supposed to be faster. See r172868/r172894. Adding Nadav in case he has anything more to say. -Eli

...low). >> In a matrix-matrix inner-kernel, I see a ~25% decrease in performance, which >> seems to be due to this. >> >> Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! > > This was intentional; apparently doing it with two instructions is > supposed to be faster. See r172868/r172894. > > Adding Nadav in case he has anything more to say. > > -Eli -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130709/c745e7fb/attachment.html>

...atrix inner-kernel, I see a ~25% decrease in performance, >> which >> seems to be due to this. >> >> Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! >> >> >> This was intentional; apparently doing it with two instructions is >> supposed to be faster. See r172868/r172894. >> >> Adding Nadav in case he has anything more to say. >> >> -Eli >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130710/86bbc835/attachment.html>...

...tails below). > In a matrix-matrix inner-kernel, I see a ~25% decrease in performance, > which > seems to be due to this. > > Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! > > > This was intentional; apparently doing it with two instructions is > supposed to be faster. See r172868/r172894. > > Adding Nadav in case he has anything more to say. > > -Eli > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130709/a7243480/attachment.html>

I'm seeing a difference in how LLVM 3.3 and 3.2 emit unaligned vector loads on AVX. 3.3 is splitting up an unaligned vector load but in 3.2, it was emitted as a single instruction (details below). In a matrix-matrix inner-kernel, I see a ~25% decrease in performance, which seems to be due to this. Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! Zach LLVM Code: define <4 x double> @vstore(<4 x

...decrease in performance, >>> which >>> seems to be due to this. >>> >>> Any ideas why this changed? Thanks! >>> >>> >>> This was intentional; apparently doing it with two instructions is >>> supposed to be faster. See r172868/r172894. >>> >>> Adding Nadav in case he has anything more to say. >>> >>> -Eli >>> >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs....