similar to: Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)

Already added in the commit (I think) On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:58 PM Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > If you don't use BBVectorize at all, you can ignore this. > > > > Hal suggested this in a thread in 2014: > >

Hi Everyone, I propose that we remove BBVectorize from trunk. Here's why: - It never made it from "interesting experiment" to "production quality" (it is not part of any in-tree optimization pipeline). - We now have an SLP vectorizer that we do use in production, had have for some time. - BBVectorize otherwise needs refactoring, and the implementation has lots of

Hi All, I'm trying to understand BB Vectorizer and gone through http://llvm.org/devmtg/2012-04-12/Slides/Hal_Finkel.pdf Wanted to know how to use bb-vectorize-debug-candidate-selection and bb-vectorize-debug-pair-selection command arguments. I tried the command with debug build clang - clang -O2 test.c -mllvm -vectorize \ -mllvm -debug-only=bb-vectorize \ -mllvm

Chris, I'd like to take code ownership of the BBVectorize code. Although not quite directory granularity (because the loop vectorizer is also in that directory), it is self-contained. Thanks again, Hal -- Hal Finkel Postdoctoral Appointee Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory

FWIW, I don't think we need any process for folks to be an owner of a file (or collection of files) for which they are the primary author of all of the code... On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Chris, > > I'd like to take code ownership of the BBVectorize code. Although not quite directory granularity (because the loop vectorizer is

Owen Anderson and I would like to be the co-owners of SelectionDAG. On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > FWIW, I don't think we need any process for folks to be an owner of a > file (or collection of files) for which they are the primary author of > all of the code... > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Hal Finkel

SelectionDAG is big enough to have multiple owners. Legalizer, dag combine, etc. can each have a separate owner. Evan On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:41 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: >> Owen Anderson and I would like to be the co-owners of SelectionDAG. > > I'm not a big fan of

On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:41 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > Owen Anderson and I would like to be the co-owners of SelectionDAG. I'm not a big fan of co-owners: how will you know which pieces you each are covering? Dan Gohman would be another candidate for owner of this area. Can we have only one owner? -Chris > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Chandler

On Nov 13, 2012, at 11:43 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > SelectionDAG is big enough to have multiple owners. Legalizer, dag combine, etc. can each have a separate owner. I don't think that makes sense given our model of code owner. The important task here is ensuring that each piece gets reviewed. Splitting things up at such a fine level doesn't help with

Hi Hal, I add a function named "vectorizeBasicBlock" which allow users to perform basic block vectoirzation inside their pass. But i am not sure whether i missed something as no one use the function right now (But it will be used by Polly sometimes later[1]). In addition, we (tobi and me) also want to make the vectorizer being configured command line flags. To achieve this, we are

> > I assume with target you mean the backend? Consider the x86 backend. It > supports 32bit and 64bit mode, with the GNU x32 ABI in between. There > are three different executable formats support (ELF, PE, MachO) with > different constraints. Some platforms require 32bit alignment of the > stack, others require 128bit alignment. The list goes on. The triple > specifies >

> Now that my domain is quickly being taken over by folks, I suppose I need to clarify what I own. :) If there are no objections, I will take ARM target and parts of code generator that are not covered by anyone else. We talked with Evan a bit. I would take the ARM EABI parts, if noone will object. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg

On Nov 14, 2012, at 11:34 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Nov 13, 2012, at 11:43 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> SelectionDAG is big enough to have multiple owners. Legalizer, dag combine, etc. can each have a

Ether, Sounds great! Please keep in mind that, eventually, we'll also want to configure those options from TLI (or something similar). The patch looks good to me. -Hal On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 23:54:18 +0800 Hongbin Zheng <etherzhhb at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Hal, > > I add a function named "vectorizeBasicBlock" which allow users to > perform basic block

On Nov 14, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 11:43 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > >> SelectionDAG is big enough to have multiple owners. Legalizer, dag combine, etc. can each have a separate owner. > > I don't think that makes sense given our model of code owner. The important task

Hello, After investigating PR14133, I've discovered that jump threading can output self-referential instructions: %inc.us = add nsw i32 %inc.us, 1 At least in the test case for that bug report, the relevant code is later deleted (perhaps it is unreachable), and so this does not cause a problem. Unfortunately, when vectorization is enabled, this instruction causes BBVectorize to hang. Should

I'm trying to vectorize a simple C code. My problem is that I don't quite understand the relationship between clang --target option and the cores mentioned in X86.td as well as other X86 related options (such as -mtune). Below are the command and the code that I'm trying to vectorize. The code compiles but I don't see any vectors. What am I doing wrong? Any help is appreciated.

My question is: How do I make clang to generate assembly with vector instruction for my target? The back story is: I've added a few vector instructions to my target and confirmed that they are used by running my code on the test below and using a following command: opt i.esencia.ll -S -march=esencia -mcpu=esencia -loop-vectorize | llc -mcpu=esencia -o i.esencia.s target datalayout =

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Trick" <atrick at apple.com> > To: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 2:32:25 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Parallel Loop Metadata > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:58 PM,

Hi there, I am Software product developer at Robert Bosch, Germany. We are using armv8 64bit targets for our development. We have the need to do the cross compiling for our target on windows. I have compiled clang 5.0 from the vcs git. I have tried compiling the code with following options set: clang.exe -target armv8 -fslp-vectorize-aggressive -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=hard -c test.cpp As you