search for: scopinfo

...folks > > at EuroLLVM last week, I hope to have a fairly good idea of how to > > proceed. To this end, I will give you my personal road map that might be > > a good start for the proposal too, though it is not the only way we > > could do this: > > > > 1) Make ScopInfo & DependenceInfo function passes to avoid the > > RegionPassManager for these Polly analysis parts. [This doesn't > > need to be the first step but it should be done at some point.] > > 2) Create a secondary ScopDetection & ScopInfo that is restricted to &g...

...uate our goals. After talking to a couple of LLVM and Polly folks at EuroLLVM last week, I hope to have a fairly good idea of how to proceed. To this end, I will give you my personal road map that might be a good start for the proposal too, though it is not the only way we could do this: 1) Make ScopInfo & DependenceInfo function passes to avoid the RegionPassManager for these Polly analysis parts. [This doesn't need to be the first step but it should be done at some point.] 2) Create a secondary ScopDetection & ScopInfo that is restricted to analyze a single loop. We m...

...to a couple of LLVM and Polly folks > at EuroLLVM last week, I hope to have a fairly good idea of how to > proceed. To this end, I will give you my personal road map that might be > a good start for the proposal too, though it is not the only way we > could do this: > > 1) Make ScopInfo & DependenceInfo function passes to avoid the > RegionPassManager for these Polly analysis parts. [This doesn't > need to be the first step but it should be done at some point.] > 2) Create a secondary ScopDetection & ScopInfo that is restricted to > analyze...

...ast week, I hope to have a fairly good idea of how to > > > proceed. To this end, I will give you my personal road map that might > be > > > a good start for the proposal too, though it is not the only way we > > > could do this: > > > > > > 1) Make ScopInfo & DependenceInfo function passes to avoid the > > > RegionPassManager for these Polly analysis parts. [This doesn't > > > need to be the first step but it should be done at some point.] > > > 2) Create a secondary ScopDetection & ScopInfo that is r...

...a fairly good idea of how to >> > > proceed. To this end, I will give you my personal road map that might >> be >> > > a good start for the proposal too, though it is not the only way we >> > > could do this: >> > > >> > > 1) Make ScopInfo & DependenceInfo function passes to avoid the >> > > RegionPassManager for these Polly analysis parts. [This doesn't >> > > need to be the first step but it should be done at some point.] >> > > 2) Create a secondary ScopDetection & ScopIn...

...__gmpn_gcd_1 () #1 0x00000001018102ea in __gmpz_gcd () #2 0x0000000101cd0f33 in isl_aff_scale_down () #3 0x0000000101a5a175 in polly::MemoryAccess::MemoryAccess (this=0x101911ed0, Access=@0x10190fc48, Statement=0x10190ffa0) at /Users/Kariddi/Documents/Sviluppo/Tesi/llvm/tools/polly/lib/Analysis/ScopInfo.cpp:308 #4 0x0000000101a5b22a in polly::ScopStmt::buildAccesses (this=0x10190ffa0, tempScop=@0x10190eb70, CurRegion=@0x10190eed0) at /Users/Kariddi/Documents/Sviluppo/Tesi/llvm/tools/polly/lib/Analysis/ScopInfo.cpp:588 #5 0x0000000101a5bc08 in polly::ScopStmt::ScopStmt (this=0x10190ffa0, parent=@...

On 11/18/2011 01:34 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: > Ok , this is what I believe is the final patch that adds the > non-affine accept functionality to Polly, this should have no issues. > > I added three tests, two in ScopInfo (two simple tests, one expected > fail and one success based on the same source) and one in CodeGen that > verifies that the code is generated. > > The patch is attached. The patch includes only one test case. I also have some tiny last comments inline. Otherwise the patch looks good....

...: clang-tidy/checkers/cert-mem57-cpp-cpp17.cpp Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/checkers/performance-noexcept-move-constructor-fix.cpp LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-cpp.s LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-macro-cpp.s LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-producer.s LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf.s Polly :: ScopInfo/memset_null.ll Expected Passes : 57692 Expected Failures : 283 Unsupported Tests : 1941 Unexpected Failures: 7 The clang-tidy tests fail since end of November-December. The MachO tests fail since about the beginning of December. The Polly test fails since a few days ago. (see below f...

On 07/28/2013 06:52 AM, Star Tan wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > I tried to investigated the problem related to ScopInfo, but I need your > help on handling some problems about ISL and SCEV. I copied the list as the discussion may be helpful for others. @Sven, no need to read all. Just search for your name. [..] >>The interesting observation is, that Polly introduces three parameters >>(p_0, p_1, p...

...ias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>: > On 11/18/2011 01:34 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: >> >> Ok , this is what I believe is the final patch that adds the >> non-affine accept functionality to Polly, this should have no issues. >> >> I added three tests, two in ScopInfo (two simple tests, one expected >> fail and one success based on the same source) and one in CodeGen that >> verifies that the code is generated. >> >> The patch is attached. > > The patch includes only one test case. I also have some tiny last comments > inline. Ot...

...on with the latest patch >>> having gone into Polly. >> >> Yes, you can view the comparison on: >>      http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/26?compare_to=25&baseline=25 > >I am slightly confused. What are we comparing here? It seems we compare  >a PollyScopInfo run with a PollyDependences run (same source code?) and  >the Dependences run shows compile time speedup over ScopInfo? This is  >surprising. In fact, there are three runs: pollyOpt (run id = 18): the baseline of Polly  pollyScopInfo (run id = 25): Polly with the ScopInfo patch r187728 that...

...t;> work for themselves and send in a patch that works. Even better if the right >> approach was taken and just some smaller remarks are necessary. >> >>> Should I make a specific subdirectory for the test case? >> >> No. I think you can put one test case in test/ScopInfo that runs >> -polly-scops -analyze and one in test/CodeGeneration that ensures that the >> correct code is generated. >> >>> >> Thanks >>>> >>>> Tobi >>>> >>>> P.S.: Please post patches to the mailing lists. >> &...

...ound in the "isValidLoop()" function with: const SCEV *LoopCount = SE->getBackedgeTakenCount(L); It returns a SCEVCouldNotCompute, but if I change the "if" block inside the loop from: if (i+j > 1000) to: if (i > 1000) that SCEV results valid. Later in the ScopInfo pass it crashes analyzing the SCEV of the comparison expression (in buildConditionSets ) . It's like if it recognizes that "i" is a recurring expression that depends on the execution of a loop, but can't derive that loop, and segfaults in getLoopDepth ... Seems like a bug of the...

...t;> having gone into Polly. >>> >>> Yes, you can view the comparison on: >>> http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/26?compare_to=25&baseline=25 >> >> I am slightly confused. What are we comparing here? It seems we compare >> a PollyScopInfo run with a PollyDependences run (same source code?) and >> the Dependences run shows compile time speedup over ScopInfo? This is >> surprising. > > In fact, there are three runs: > > pollyOpt (run id = 18): the baseline of Polly > pollyScopInfo (run id = 25): Polly with t...

...t grosser.es>: >> On 11/18/2011 01:34 PM, Marcello Maggioni wrote: >>> >>> Ok , this is what I believe is the final patch that adds the >>> non-affine accept functionality to Polly, this should have no issues. >>> >>> I added three tests, two in ScopInfo (two simple tests, one expected >>> fail and one success based on the same source) and one in CodeGen that >>> verifies that the code is generated. >>> >>> The patch is attached. >> >> The patch includes only one test case. I also have some tiny last...

I have modified the code as follows; now i am using both scopdetection and scopinformation before dependency check but i think link is missing... virtual bool runOnFunction(Function &F) { std::unique_ptr<ScopInfo> Result; std::unique_ptr<ScopDetection> Result2; //polly::ScopDetection pl; auto &LI = getAnalysis<LoopInfoWrapperPass>().getLoopInfo...

...ormance-noexcept-move-constructor-fix.cpp >> >> LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-cpp.s >> >> LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-macro-cpp.s >> >> LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf-producer.s >> >> LLVM :: MC/MachO/gen-dwarf.s >> >> Polly :: ScopInfo/memset_null.ll >> >> >> >> Expected Passes : 57692 >> >> Expected Failures : 283 >> >> Unsupported Tests : 1941 >> >> Unexpected Failures: 7 >> >> >> >> The clang-tidy tests fail since end of November-D...

Hi, thanks to Tobias for doing most of the work to get the vector code generation working with ISL's code generation. Attached are two patches to port the vector code generation part of the testsuite from Cloog/CodeGen to Isl/CodeGen. Tobi, do you want to commit these two patches separately, or you want me to combine them, as the second patch is needed to make the testsuite pass? Also, let

...s pass in gdb i get no data. Why is that so? My code is follows; namespace { struct mypass : public FunctionPass { static char ID; mypass() : FunctionPass(ID) { } virtual bool runOnFunction(Function &F) { polly::DependenceInfoWrapperPass dp; auto &SI = *getAnalysis<polly::ScopInfoWrapperPass>().getSI(); for (auto &It : SI) { assert(It.second && "Invalid SCoP object!"); dp.recomputeDependences(It.second.get(), polly::Dependences::AL_Access); } virtual void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const { AU.addRequiredTransitive&l...

...o get an up-to-date comparison with the latest patch >> having gone into Polly. > > Yes, you can view the comparison on: > http://188.40.87.11:8000/db_default/v4/nts/26?compare_to=25&baseline=25 I am slightly confused. What are we comparing here? It seems we compare a PollyScopInfo run with a PollyDependences run (same source code?) and the Dependences run shows compile time speedup over ScopInfo? This is surprising. The numbers rather suggest that those are two Dependences runs the first without the patch applied the second with. If this is the case, why does the page sa...