search for: vpred

...e.mask not create the %mask of the VP intrinsics? Or in other words, in the vectoriser, who's producing the %mask and %evl that is consumed by the VP intrinsics? I'm not sure what would be the best way here. I think about the Loop Vectorizer. I imagine at some point we can teach LV to emit VPred for the widening. VPred IR needs two additional operands, as you mentioned, %evl and %mask. One option is make %evl the max-vector-length of the type being operated and %mask (that is the "outer block mask" in this context) be get.active.lane.mask. This maps well for SVE and MVE not so m...

...he %mask of the VP intrinsics? Or in other > words, in the vectoriser, who's producing the %mask and %evl that is > consumed by the VP intrinsics? > > I'm not sure what would be the best way here. I think about the Loop Vectorizer. I imagine at some point we can teach LV to emit VPred for the widening. VPred IR needs two additional operands, as you mentioned, %evl and %mask. One option is make %evl the max-vector-length of the type being operated and %mask (that is the "outer block mask" in this context) be get.active.lane.mask. This maps well for SVE and MVE not so m...

...e.mask not create the %mask of the VP intrinsics? Or in other words, in the vectoriser, who's producing the %mask and %evl that is consumed by the VP intrinsics? I'm not sure what would be the best way here. I think about the Loop Vectorizer. I imagine at some point we can teach LV to emit VPred for the widening. VPred IR needs two additional operands, as you mentioned, %evl and %mask. One option is make %evl the max-vector-length of the type being operated and %mask (that is the "outer block mask" in this context) be get.active.lane.mask. This maps well for SVE and MVE not so m...

...e.mask not create the %mask of the VP intrinsics? Or in other words, in the vectoriser, who's producing the %mask and %evl that is consumed by the VP intrinsics? I'm not sure what would be the best way here. I think about the Loop Vectorizer. I imagine at some point we can teach LV to emit VPred for the widening. VPred IR needs two additional operands, as you mentioned, %evl and %mask. One option is make %evl the max-vector-length of the type being operated and %mask (that is the "outer block mask" in this context) be get.active.lane.mask. This maps well for SVE and MVE not so m...

...ect: Re: [llvm-dev] Loop-vectorizer prototype for the EPI Project based on the RISC-V Vector Extension (Scalable vectors) Hi all, On 11/5/20 10:32 AM, Roger Ferrer Ibáñez wrote: Hi Sjoerd, thanks for pointing us to this intrinsic. I see it returns a mask/predicate type. My understanding is that VPred intrinsics have both a vector length operand and a mask operand. It looks to me that a "popcount" of get.active.lane.mask would correspond to the vector length operand. Then additional "control flow" mask of predicated code would correspond to the mask operand. My intepretation...

...e.mask not create the %mask of the VP intrinsics? Or in other words, in the vectoriser, who's producing the %mask and %evl that is consumed by the VP intrinsics? I'm not sure what would be the best way here. I think about the Loop Vectorizer. I imagine at some point we can teach LV to emit VPred for the widening. VPred IR needs two additional operands, as you mentioned, %evl and %mask. One option is make %evl the max-vector-length of the type being operated and %mask (that is the "outer block mask" in this context) be get.active.lane.mask. This maps well for SVE and MVE not so m...

I fitted a GAM model with Poisson distribution using the function gam() in the mgcv package. My model is of the form: mod<-gam(y~s(x0)+s(x1)+s(x2),family=poisson). To extract estimates at a specified set of covariate values I used the gam `predict' method. But I want to get estimate and standard error of the difference of two fitted values. Can someone explain what should I do? Thank

Hi all, On 11/5/20 10:32 AM, Roger Ferrer Ibáñez wrote: Hi Sjoerd, thanks for pointing us to this intrinsic. I see it returns a mask/predicate type. My understanding is that VPred intrinsics have both a vector length operand and a mask operand. It looks to me that a "popcount" of get.active.lane.mask would correspond to the vector length operand. Then additional "control flow" mask of predicated code would correspond to the mask operand. My intepretation...

Hi Simon, Thanks for reposting the example, and looking at it more carefully, I think it is very similar to my first proposal. This was met with some resistance here because it dumps loop information in the vector preheader. Doing it this early, we want to emit this in the vectoriser, puts a restriction on (future) optimisations that transform vector loops to honour/update/support this intrinsic