search for: ulps

We seemed to have it a stumbling block when building with the above (supported) versions. Our process... 1. Start with stock rhel5 2.6.18-8.1.14 source tree 2. Configure InfiniBand support out of the the kernel (we will build OFED separately). 3. Apply the 1.6.4.2 kernel patches to the kernel source. 4. Build the kernel. 5. Build OFED 1.2 against the patched kernel 6. Build Lustre using

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/12/2017 9:33 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: >>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 >>> Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

...ppreciated. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Specification ------------- The metadata attribute is named "fpaccuracy", and contains a single integer parameter which specifies the maximum relative error of the operation to which it is attached, in ULPs. For the definition of ULPs we follow the definition given in the OpenCL 1.1 specification (section 7.4): If x is a real number that lies between two finite consecutive floating-point numbers a and b, without being equal to one of them, then ulp(x) = |b - a|, otherwise ulp(x) is the distance...

In InstCombineCompares.cpp, routine InstCombiner::FoldFCmp_IntToFP_Cst, there are these lines: // Comparisons with zero are a special case where we know we won't lose // information. bool IsCmpZero = RHS.isPosZero(); // If the conversion would lose info, don't hack on this. if ((int)InputSize > MantissaWidth && !IsCmpZero) return nullptr; Why check for positive

...-------------------------------------------------- > > Specification > ------------- > > The metadata attribute is named "fpaccuracy", and contains a single > integer parameter which specifies the maximum relative error of the > operation to which it is attached, in ULPs. For the definition of > ULPs we follow the definition given in the OpenCL 1.1 specification > (section 7.4): > > If x is a real number that lies between two finite > consecutive floating-point numbers a and b, without being > equal to one of them, then ulp(x) = |b - a|, othe...

...arguments as more settings become available). Note that as the current option isn't actually connected to any optimizations, there is nothing much to argue about for the moment. My plan is to introduce a few simple optimizations (x + 0.0 -> x for example) that introduce a finite number of ULPs of error, and hook them up. Thus this does not include things like x * 0.0 -> 0.0 (infinite ULPs of error), reassociation (infinite ULPs of error) or any other scary things. which mostly boil down to the fact that this is a very C-centric view of the world. And, since C compilers are not g...

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 12, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Steve (Numerics) Canon <scanon at apple.com <mailto:scanon at apple.com>> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > If we require the host to have sse2 or other IEEE 754 conformant > implementation, would it be possible to use hardware float? > I don't think that IEEE 754 actually guarantees bit-exact results in all cases. -- Sean Silva > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On

Dear LLVM contributors, I am Naoki Shibata, an associate professor at Nara Institute of Science and Technology. I and Hal Finkel would like to jointly propose to add my vectorized math library to LLVM. The library has been available as public domain software for years, I am going to double-license the library if necessary. ******** Below is a proposal to add my vectorized math library,

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 > Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I want an efficient way to implement function pow in LLVM instead of >> invoking pow() math built-in. For algorithm part, I am clear for the

...h can be > used to signal that reduced precision is OK for a floating point operation, eg > > %z = fmul float %x, %y, !fpmath !0 > ... > !0 = metadata !{double 2.5} > > indicates that the multiplication can be done in any way that doesn't introduce > more than 2.5 ULPs of error. > > The first observation is that !fpmath can be extended with additional operands > in the future: operands that say things like whether it is OK to assume that > there are no NaNs and so forth. > > This patch doesn't add additional operands though. It just allow...

Many DRM drivers implement an encoder with an empty implementation. This patchset adds drm_simple_encoder_init() and drm_simple_encoder_create(), which can be used by drivers instead. Except for the destroy callback, the simple encoder's implementation is empty. The patchset also converts 4 encoder instances to use the simple-encoder helpers. But there are at least 11 other drivers which can

...-------- > --- > > > > Specification > > ------------- > > > > The metadata attribute is named "fpaccuracy", and contains a single > > integer parameter which specifies the maximum relative error of the > > operation to which it is attached, in ULPs. For the definition of > > ULPs we follow the definition given in the OpenCL 1.1 specification > > (section 7.4): > > > > If x is a real number that lies between two finite > > consecutive floating-point numbers a and b, without being > > equal to one of them...

...ot;fpmath" metadata type which can be used to signal that reduced precision is OK for a floating point operation, eg %z = fmul float %x, %y, !fpmath !0 ... !0 = metadata !{double 2.5} indicates that the multiplication can be done in any way that doesn't introduce more than 2.5 ULPs of error. The first observation is that !fpmath can be extended with additional operands in the future: operands that say things like whether it is OK to assume that there are no NaNs and so forth. This patch doesn't add additional operands though. It just allows the existing accuracy operan...

Hi Duncan, I'm not an expert in fp accuracy question, but I had quite a few experience dealing with fp accuracy problems during compiler transformations. I think you have a step in the right direction, walking away from ULPs, which are pretty useless for the purpose of describing allowed fp optimizations IMHO. But using just "fast" keyword (or whatever else will be added in the future) is not enough without strict definition of this keyword in terms of IR transformations. For example, particular transformatio...

Dear all, thanks for your feedback so far. With the help of a colleague I think I found the solution to my problem: > pt(10,100,lower=FALSE) [1] 4.950844e-17 IS *NOT* EQUAL TO > 1-pt(10,100,lower=TRUE) [1] 0 This means that R is capable of providing p-values < 2.2e-16, however, if the value is used in a substraction or addition then the default value of the machine epsilon

...not an expert in fp accuracy question, but I had quite a > few experience dealing with fp accuracy problems during compiler transformations. I agree that it's a minefield which is why I intend to proceed conservatively. > I think you have a step in the right direction, walking away from ULPs, which > are pretty useless for the purpose of describing allowed fp optimizations IMHO. > But using just "fast" keyword (or whatever else will be added in the future) is > not enough without strict definition of this keyword in terms of IR > transformations. For example, part...

On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > > I think you have a step in the right direction, walking away from ULPs, >> which >> are pretty useless for the purpose of describing allowed fp optimizations >> IMHO. >> But using just "fast" keyword (or whatever else will be added in the >> future) is >> not enough without strict definition of this keyword in terms of IR...

I am a french student and I want to make an histogram with R.But I have a problem: I cant' change the frequencies in percent and I can't change the number of classes or intervals of my variable.Can you help me please,in french if it's possible? My mail is : fhenge at ulp.u-strasbg.fr Thanks a lot. HENGE FREDERIQUE

Hi Given a real number x, I want to know how accurately R can represent numbers near x. In particular, I want to know the infinum of exactly representable numbers greater than x, and the supremum of exactly representable numbers less than x. And then the interesting thing is the difference between these two. I have a little function that does some of this: f <-