Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?"
2007 Nov 22
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?
Hi,
> Current llvm-gcc cannot emit llvm intrinsic function like llvm.pow.* and
> llvm.sin.*
> For example:
>
> double foo(double x, double y) {
> return pow(x,y);
> }
>
> will compiled into ll:
>
> define double @foo(double %x, double %y) {
> %tmp3 = tail call double @pow( double %x, double %y )
> ret double %tmp3
> }
>
> This is not
2007 Nov 22
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?
2007/11/22, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Current llvm-gcc cannot emit llvm intrinsic function like llvm.pow.* and
> > llvm.sin.*
> > For example:
> >
> > double foo(double x, double y) {
> > return pow(x,y);
> > }
> >
> > will compiled into ll:
> >
> > define double @foo(double %x, double %y) {
2007 Nov 22
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?
PS: It is possible that the C front-end doesn't need to
explicitly produce BUILT_IN_POW because it is auto-synthesized
somehow from a call to "pow". I wouldn't know. One way to
find out is to compile a testcase and rummage around inside
the gcc trees when they hit llvm-convert.
2007 Nov 22
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?
Hi,
2007/11/22, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>:
>
> PS: It is possible that the C front-end doesn't need to
> explicitly produce BUILT_IN_POW because it is auto-synthesized
> somehow from a call to "pow". I wouldn't know. One way to
> find out is to compile a testcase and rummage around inside
> the gcc trees when they hit llvm-convert.
Yes, they
2007 Nov 22
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc cannot emit @llvm.pow.* ?
Hi,
> Sure. But now the question is the llvm-gcc will not emit llvm.pow.* anytime.
indeed there seems to be no code in llvm-gcc to do so, though there is code for
raising to an integer power (in llvm-convert). Please feel free to investigate
and add some. Presumably it should turn gcc's BUILT_IN_POW into llvm.pow.*.
That said, as far as I can see the C front-end doesn't generate
2008 Jan 14
3
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc miscompilation or it's the gcc's rule?
Hi,
Here is C function:
uint64_t mul(uint32_t x, uint32_t y) {
return x * y;
}
current llvm-gcc-4.0 with -O3 will compile it to:
define i64 @mul(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind {
entry:
%tmp3 = mul i32 %y, %x ; <i32> [#uses=1]
%tmp34 = zext i32 %tmp3 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
ret i64 %tmp34
}
This seems incorrect. I think it should extend %x, %y to i64 first and
2017 Jan 12
2
The most efficient way to implement an integer based power function pow in LLVM
> 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
2017 Jan 12
2
The most efficient way to implement an integer based power function pow in LLVM
> 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
2017 Jan 12
2
The most efficient way to implement an integer based power function pow in LLVM
> 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>>
2008 Mar 03
1
[LLVMdev] Cloning a function
Hi,
we have two modules, one that we basically use as a library in which we store
a lot of simple function calls, the other is small program generated at
run-time.
Whenever a function call for to one of the builtin functions is being called
we use CloneFunction to clone the instruction from the library module and
insert it in the generated module.
The problem is for example when we have
2017 Jan 09
5
The most efficient way to implement an integer based power function pow in LLVM
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 logic.
But I am not quite sure for which parts of LLVM should I replace built-in
pow with another efficient pow implementation. Any comments and feedback
are appreciated. Thanks!
--
Wei Ding
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was
2015 Mar 25
3
[Bug 89758] New: pow WebGL Conformance test with mesa drivers
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89758
Bug ID: 89758
Summary: pow WebGL Conformance test with mesa drivers
Product: Mesa
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
Component: Drivers/DRI/nouveau
Assignee: nouveau at
2011 Feb 12
3
[LLVMdev] pow operator on Windows
I have a very simple test case on Windows that shows some surprising behavior. This doesn't seem to be a problem on Linux.
The example is:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
double heat(double Pr) {
return pow(Pr, 0.33);
}
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
double Nu = heat(291.00606180486119);
printf("%.20f\n", Nu);
}
I've tested with MinGW's gcc.exe
2017 Jun 20
2
Problem with shortestPath in igraph and qgraph
hello,
I have a graph and i use qgraph package to calculate centrality parameters.
Now I want to know the maximum value of shortest path for each vertex with
discarding the Inf value in short pathes. For this I use the
ShortestPathLengths of centrality function in qgraph. but when I want to
get the maximum the result is wrong. here is my code:
cen<-centrality(Q)
2014 Feb 05
2
[LLVMdev] SCEV implementation and limitations, do we need "pow"?
Hi,
I was looking at some bugs to play with, and I started with
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18606
As I commented there, a loop is unrolled and exhibit this pattern:
%mul.1 = mul i32 %mul, %mul
%mul.2 = mul i32 %mul.1, %mul.1
....
With an unroll factor of 32, the last multiply has 2^32 terms in its
SCEV expression.
(I mean I expect it would have those terms if I was patient
2017 Jun 21
0
Problem with shortestPath in igraph and qgraph
Hard to follow data analysis without data. Try making your example reproducible [1][2][3] and post in plain text (a setting in your emailer). Read the Posting Guide mentioned in the footer to avoid other posting pitfalls.
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5963269/how-to-make-a-great-r-reproducible-example
[2] http://adv-r.had.co.nz/Reproducibility.html
[3]
2014 Feb 08
3
[LLVMdev] SCEV implementation and limitations, do we need "pow"?
On 2/7/14, 10:24 AM, Andrew Trick wrote:
>
> On Feb 5, 2014, at 12:54 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at silkan.com
> <mailto:mehdi.amini at silkan.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was looking at some bugs to play with, and I started with
>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18606
>>
>> As I commented there, a loop is unrolled and exhibit
2012 Jun 25
0
Trouble with starting pow
I set up a new project on my computer and created the development
link. I am very new to Ruby and just need help in determining where
to look to solve the issues I am having getting access to the
project. Here are the errors I get when trying to visit my
application:
Bundler::GemNotFound: Could not find rake-0.9.2.2 in any of the
sources
2013 Jan 30
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop awareness to the LoopVectorizer
On 01/29/2013 07:58 PM, Nadav Rotem wrote:
>
> On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es
> <mailto:tobias at grosser.es>> wrote:
>
>>
>> # ignore assumed dependences.
>> for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
>> tmp1 = A[3i+1];
>> tmp2 = A[3i+2];
>> tmp3 = tmp1 + tmp2;
>> A[3i] = tmp3;
>> }
>>
2007 Jan 17
1
tapply, data.frame problem
Hi R-users,
I'm quite new to R and trying to learn the basics. I have a following
problem concerning the convertion of array object into data frame. I have
made following data sets
tmp1 <- rnorm(100)
tmp2 <- gl(10,2,length=100)
tmp3 <- as.data.frame(cbind(tmp1,tmp2))
tmp3.sum <- tapply(tmp3$tmp1,tmp3$tmp2,sum)
tmp3.sum <- as.data.frame(tapply(tmp1,tmp2,sum))
and I want the