similar to: Date label lost while inverting y axis.

I have been working on a patch to add support for max/min reductions in LoopVectorize. One of the comments that came up in review is that the implementation could be simplified (and less fragile) if max and min intrinsics were recognized rather than looking for compare-select sequences. The suggestion was to change compare-selects into max and min intrinsic calls during instcombine. The

Hi all, I'm trying to get llvm to optimize away the %cmp to true in define i32 @foo(i32* %array, i32* %length_ptr, i32 %init) { entry: %length = load i32* %length_ptr, !range !0 %len.sub.1 = sub i32 %length, 1 %upper = icmp slt i32 %init, %len.sub.1 br i1 %upper, label %loop, label %exit loop: %civ = phi i32 [ %init, %entry ], [ %civ.inc, %latch ] %civ.inc = add i32 %civ, 1

Hi Nick, I checked in something towards (1) yesterday -- http://reviews.llvm.org/D6748 I was under the impression that (2) is exactly the kind of predicate ScalarEvolution::isKnownPredicate is designed to solve (using isImpliedCondXXX or something like that). Is there a reason to prefer GVN over that? On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Sanjoy

Hi all, I wish to draw 2 hist (or barplot) on the same graph. I can do it simply by using par(new=TRUE) , but it overlap with the first drawn, how to tell R to put in front of the graph the min value of the two graph in order for it to be seen and don't hide each other. I've been looking at help for barplot or hist but didn't find anything... (or my english is too poor to

Good afternoon, I have been experiencing a lot of crashes working with large vectors in R. Specifically, I am using XTS of length of minimum 120k elements. My problem is that I cannot display the vector (otherwise R crashes), I cannot plot it either (otherwise R crashes). That could be solved by reducing the amount of points. However, I have been performing some statistical opreations on is

On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 22:55 -0700, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Mai, Haohui wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm working on a project which tries to prove an access to an array is > > safe. For example, > > > > int foo(int s) { > > int * p = malloc(s * sizeof int); > > ... > > int q = p[s - 2]; > > } > > > > then the access

Mai, Haohui wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on a project which tries to prove an access to an array is > safe. For example, > > int foo(int s) { > int * p = malloc(s * sizeof int); > ... > int q = p[s - 2]; > } > > then the access of p[s - 2] always stays in bound. > > I implemented a prototype using the Scalar Evolution pass. Here are the

Nick, It might be a little bit difficult to handle SMax correctly. But is it possible to reduce A+(-A) to 0 in SAddExpr? Haohui On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 01:05 -0500, Mai, Haohui wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 22:55 -0700, Nick Lewycky wrote: > > Mai, Haohui wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm working on a project which tries to prove an access to an array

Mai, Haohui wrote: > Nick, > > It might be a little bit difficult to handle SMax correctly. But is it > possible to reduce A+(-A) to 0 in SAddExpr? Yes, it should already do that. Here's a quick test I wrote up: $ cat x.ll define i8 @test(i8 %x) { %neg = sub i8 0, %x %sum = add i8 %x, %neg ret i8 %sum } $ llvm-as < x.ll | opt -analyze

Dear R-list members, I have a problem with translating a mathematica script into R. The whole script is at the end of the email (with initial values for easy reproduction) and can be pasted directly into R. The problematic part (which is included below of course) is <--- Original Mathematica ---> (* p_svbar *) UiA = Ni (Dsi - 2Di A + A^2)/2; UiiA = Nii (Dsii - 2Dii A + A^2)/2; psvbar =

Hi all, I'm working on a project which tries to prove an access to an array is safe. For example, int foo(int s) { int * p = malloc(s * sizeof int); ... int q = p[s - 2]; } then the access of p[s - 2] always stays in bound. I implemented a prototype using the Scalar Evolution pass. Here are the pseudo-code of the implementation: const SCEV * offset =

Hi All, I am writing a simulation that examines the effects of species extinctions on ecological communties by sequentially removing individuals of a given species (sometimes using weighted probabilities) and replacing the lost individuals with species identities randomly sampled from the remaining individuals. Thus I use two dataframes. One contains all the individuals and their species

Good afternoon everybody, I am sorry, this question might look trivial to some of you, but I read quite a lot of stuff about package creation and I would like a bit of you advices. I would like to develop a core library which I will be using both from R and from C#. I read that it was possible to import DLL to R. The thing is, I am not sure that the DLL created with C# will be compatible. I

Hi Jean Marc & List, So I have been fiddling with the denoiser (again). While poking around I noticed that nb_preprocess is basically a counter that is mod-ded with 100 (the default), which causes Smin[] to be re- seeded with the value in Stmp[] (min of the previous adaptation period). Smin[] is then used to update the noise probability, which is (probably) less likely when adaptation

Hi Yin, > To use select, usually, there is a compare before select. > Presence of comparison will disable some opportunities to > optimize some code. Select and Compare is not associative > neither. at the IR level LLVM already has pattern matching helpers for identifying min/max idioms, here is part of a transform using this, from InstructionSimplify.cpp: // Signed variants

Hi Duncan, Yes, exactly. However, we need define Opcode MIN/MAX Into ISDOpcodes.h. Do you like to add those two definitions Into the tree? Thanks, Yin -----Original Message----- From: Duncan Sands [mailto:duncan.sands at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Duncan Sands Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:10 PM To: Yin Ma Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Any plan to

On Dec 5, 2012, at 8:26 AM, "Redmond, Paul" <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote: > I have been working on a patch to add support for max/min reductions in LoopVectorize. One of the comments that came up in review is that the implementation could be simplified (and less fragile) if max and min intrinsics were recognized rather than looking for compare-select sequences. > >

Hi Sanjay, The benchmark source file: http://www.llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/test-suite/trunk/SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/sieve.c?view=markup Clang options used to produce the initial IR: clang -DNDEBUG -O3 -DNDEBUG -mcpu=cortex-a53 -fomit-frame-pointer -O3 -DNDEBUG -w -Werror=date-time -c sieve.c -S -emit-llvm -mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns --target=aarch64-arm-linux Opt options: opt -O3

Hi, We found that today's 17.30%/11.37% performance regressions in LNT SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/sieve on LNT-AArch64-A53-O3__clang_DEV__aarch64 and LNT-Thumb2v7-A15-O3__clang_DEV__thumbv7 (http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/daily_report/2017/1/20?filter-machine-regex=aarch64%7Carm%7Cthumb%7Cgreen) are caused by changes [rL292492] in InstCombine: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28406

Thank you for information. I’ll build clang without the hack and re-run the benchmark tomorrow. -Evgeny From: Sanjay Patel [mailto:spatel at rotateright.com] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 8:00 PM To: Evgeny Astigeevich Cc: llvm-dev; nd Subject: Re: [InstCombine] rL292492 affected LoopVectorizer and caused 17.30%/11.37% perf regressions on Cortex-A53/Cortex-A15 LNT machines > Do you mean to