Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "singleacc".
2013 Aug 16
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Analysis of extra compile-time overhead for simple nested loops
On 08/16/2013 02:42 AM, Star Tan wrote:
> At 2013-08-16 12:44:02,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I tried to reproduce your findings, but could not do so.
>
>
> Sorry, I did not put all code in my previous email because the code seems a little too long and complicated.
> You can refer to the detailed C code and LLVM IR
2013 Aug 17
2
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Analysis of extra compile-time overhead for simple nested loops
...x=1
>
>Sorry, I meant
> x[0] +=
>
It is interesting that Polly would run much faster if we change the "x=0" to "X[0]=0" or "X[0]+=0 in the nested loops.
First, if the nested loop only contains a statement "X[0]+=0", like this:
// SingleAcc.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int n = ((argc == 2) ? atoi(argv[1]) : 46);
int a, b, c, d, e, f, x=0;
int X[10];
for (a=0; a<n; a++)
for (b=0; b<n; b++)
for (c=0; c<n; c++)
for (d=0; d<n; d++)
f...
2013 Aug 16
2
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Analysis of extra compile-time overhead for simple nested loops
At 2013-08-16 12:44:02,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I tried to reproduce your findings, but could not do so.
Sorry, I did not put all code in my previous email because the code seems a little too long and complicated.
You can refer to the detailed C code and LLVM IR code on http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16843
There are four attachments