Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "stotzer".
Did you mean:
estotzer
2019 Mar 12
1
Handling of __c11_atomic_is_lock_free({1, 2, 4, 8}) in compiler-rt atomic.c
...,
// the answer can only be determined at runtime; for example, 16-byte
// atomics have lock-free implementations on some, but not all,
// x86-64 processors.
BTW, I think that should be: “If the size isn’t a power of two or IS greater than the maximum…”.
Comments?
Beast Regards,
Eric Stotzer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190312/3b8bf542/attachment.html>
2018 Jan 09
1
RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality)
...rom: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov]
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2018 9:20 PM
To: Saito, Hideki <hideki.saito at intel.com>; aemerson at apple.com
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>; Amara Emerson <amara.emerson at arm.com>; Stotzer, Eric <estotzer at ti.com>; Nemanja Ivanovic <nemanja.i.ibm at gmail.com>; Kreitzer, David L <david.l.kreitzer at intel.com>; Nuzman, Dorit <dorit.nuzman at intel.com>; Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com>; James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com>; Sander De Smalen <...
2018 Jan 06
2
RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality)
...mailto:aemerson at apple.com]
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 3:38 PM
To: Saito, Hideki <hideki.saito at intel.com>
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>; Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>; Amara Emerson <amara.emerson at arm.com>; Stotzer, Eric <estotzer at ti.com>; Nemanja Ivanovic <nemanja.i.ibm at gmail.com>; Kreitzer, David L <david.l.kreitzer at intel.com>; Nuzman, Dorit <dorit.nuzman at intel.com>; Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com>; James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com>; Sander De Smalen <...
2018 Jan 07
0
RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality)
...n at apple.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 3:38 PM
> To: Saito, Hideki <hideki.saito at intel.com>
> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>; Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>; Amara Emerson <amara.emerson at arm.com>; Stotzer, Eric <estotzer at ti.com>; Nemanja Ivanovic <nemanja.i.ibm at gmail.com>; Kreitzer, David L <david.l.kreitzer at intel.com>; Nuzman, Dorit <dorit.nuzman at intel.com>; Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com>; James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com>; Sander De Smalen <...
2018 Jan 05
0
RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality)
> On 5 Jan 2018, at 21:01, Saito, Hideki via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> All,
>
> I'm trying to refactor LoopVectorize such that it has better conformance to VPlan vision going forward
> (http://www.llvm.org/docs/Proposals/VectorizationPlan.html). All VP*Recipe class definitions are now
> moved to VPlan.h, and I have a patch under review
2018 Jan 05
2
RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality)
All,
I'm trying to refactor LoopVectorize such that it has better conformance to VPlan vision going forward
(http://www.llvm.org/docs/Proposals/VectorizationPlan.html). All VP*Recipe class definitions are now
moved to VPlan.h, and I have a patch under review to move LoopVectorizationPlanner class out of
LoopVectorize.cpp (https://reviews.llvm.org/D41420).
Next thing I'm working on is