search for: syoyofujita

Hello David, > I try to put [AVX] in the subject of patch mailings (to -commits) and > commit messages.  Once in a while I forget.  I'll try to remeber to send > semething to -dev when major stuff appears. Good. I am also trying to sending a patch to llvm-commits. It'd be better for me to use [AVX] prefix in the subject so that we can easily identify "This is an AVX

Ralf Karrenberg <Chareos at gmx.de> writes: > This sounds great! > > For my case, I only require some basic support, so I am optimistic > that your next few patches will provide everything I need. If my evil plan works out, within the next 10 or so patches we should be in a place where pushing everything up goes pretty quickly. It's about 8 TableGen patches and then a

Hello LLVMer's I am now trying to fix a bug PR9473. sitofp instruction in LLVM IR is converted to vcvtsi2sd(also applied to vcvtsi2ss case) for x86/AVX backend, but vcvtsi2sd is somewhat odd instruction format. VCVTSI2SD xmm1, xmm2, r/m32 VCVTSI2SD xmm1, xmm2, r/m64 bits(127:64) of xmm2 is copied to corresponding bits of xmm1, thus in many case xmm1 and xmm2 could be same register.

Thanks for many comments. The loop with finite fp values(which could be representable in IEEE754 fp format) such like, void foo() { float i; for (i = 0.0f; i < 1000.0f; i += 1.2f) { } } could reach the end condition under any fp rounding mode, and eliminating the loop has no side effects. (for example, floating point control register does not change because the increment does

Hi LLVM-ers, I am trying to get a return type of a function(from bitcode file) with LLVM-C API, but there seems no appropriate API to do that. I've tried to do that with following code, ---- LLVMModuleRef M; LLVMMemoryBufferRef MemBuf; LLVMValueRef F; // Function LLVMTypeRef RetTy; char *ErrStr; // // -- Load shader module //

Hi LLVM-ers, I'd like to eliminate dead loop with floating point counter using LLVM, but the following loop wasn't optimized by opt. void func() { float i; for (i = 0.0f; i < 1000.0f; i += 1.2f) { } } $ clang -emit-llvm-bc floop.c $ opt -std-compile-opts floop.bc | llvm-dis define void @func(...) nounwind { entry: br label %forinc forinc: ; preds = %forinc, %entry

Hi Devang, Thanks. Yes, in the case variable i incremented by 1.0f is optimized. I don't know why... Anyway, I've filed this problem into bugzilla(Bug 3299) -- Syoyo On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:36 AM, Syoyo Fujita wrote: > >> Hi LLVM-ers, >> >> I'd like to eliminate dead loop