Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "scalarrevolution".
Did you mean:
scalarevolution
2015 Jun 10
3
[LLVMdev] Question about NoWrap flag for SCEVAddRecExpr
...[2*k] = x[2*k]+y[k];
}
}
Vectorization failed due to "unsafe dependent memory operation". I traced
the LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp and found the reason is the NoWrapFlag for
SCEVAddRecExpr is not set and consequently the dependence distant became
unknown.
Can anyone familiar with ScalarRevolution tell me whether this is an
expected behavior or a bug?
Tong
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150610/7949fbac/attachment.html>
2015 Jun 11
4
[LLVMdev] Question about NoWrap flag for SCEVAddRecExpr
[+Arnold]
> On Jun 10, 2015, at 1:29 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote:
>
> [+CC Andy]
>
>> Can anyone familiar with ScalarRevolution tell me whether this is an
>> expected behavior or a bug?
>
> Assuming you're talking about 2*k, this is a bug. ScalarEvolution
> should be able to prove that {0,+,4} is <nsw> and <nuw>.
I also find it surprising that the inbounds gep does not allow us to prove nuw...
2015 Jun 11
2
[LLVMdev] Question about NoWrap flag for SCEVAddRecExpr
...ed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote:
>> [+Arnold]
>>
>>> On Jun 10, 2015, at 1:29 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [+CC Andy]
>>>
>>>> Can anyone familiar with ScalarRevolution tell me whether this is an
>>>> expected behavior or a bug?
>>>
>>> Assuming you're talking about 2*k, this is a bug. ScalarEvolution
>>> should be able to prove that {0,+,4} is <nsw> and <nuw>.
>>
>> I also find it surprising th...