similar to: [LLVMdev] Resizing vector values

Since Clang does not seem to allow type casts, such as uchar4 to float4, between vector types, it seems it is necessary to write them as element by element conversions, such as typedef float float4 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(4))); typedef unsigned char uchar4 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(4))); float4 to_float4(uchar4 in) { float4 out = {in.x, in.y, in.z, in.w}; return out; } Running

Hi, The current definition of shuffle vector is <result> = shufflevector <n x <ty>> <v1>, <n x <ty>> <v2>, <n x i32> <mask> ; yields <n x <ty>> The first two operands of a 'shufflevector' instruction are vectors with types that match each other and types that match the result of the instruction. The third

On Jun 27, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Stefanus Du Toit wrote: >>>> <result> = shufflevector <a x <ty>> <v1>, <b x <ty>> <v2>, <d x >>>> i32> >>>> <mask> ; yields <d x <ty>> >>> >>> With the requirement that the entries in the (still constant) mask >>> are >>> within

Hi John, On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 8:43 AM, John Criswell <criswell at uiuc.edu> wrote: > Does the debug facilities in LLVM TOT, at present, maintain information > better than LLVM 2.6 (i.e., if a front-end puts the debug information in, > will the optimizations not take it out)?  Does the information that the > llvm-gcc front-end adds comparable to what llvm-gcc in LLVM 2.6 does?

On Wednesday 09 July 2008 12:16, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > > I seem to recall havbing asked this before but I can't find it by > > searching. > > > > What's the right way to clone a Function? I need to save off the text at > > a certain point and spit it out later, after other

Hi, I want to duplicate a function and transfer it from one module to another. I found "CloneFunction()" but it needs an "vMap". I found that "vMap" is used to map the original values to the new values. So, hypothetically, if the original function uses a global variable from the previous module and I want that use in the new function to be mapped to a global variable

On Jul 9, 2008, at 10:43 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Wednesday 09 July 2008 12:16, Eli Friedman wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: >>> I seem to recall havbing asked this before but I can't find it by >>> searching. >>> >>> What's the right way to clone a Function? I need to save off the

Hello LLVM Devs, I am starting my PhD on Automatic Parallelization for DSP and want to play with some ARM NEON intrinsics for a start. I spent the last three days trying to compile a version of LLVM that would allow me to compile sources that contain these intrinsics, but with no success. In the process I found out that clang doesn't support NEON (as per

Hi Dan, Thanks for your comments. I've responded inline below. On 26-Jun-08, at 6:49 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Jun 26, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Stefanus Du Toit wrote: >> >> === >> 1. Shufflevector only accepts vectors of the same type >> >> I would propose to change the syntax from: >> >>> <result> = shufflevector <n x <ty>>

Hi, I’m looking at RegBankSelect’s partially implemented support for deciding to split a value between multiple registers and I’m wondering if it’s actually intended to solve the problem I’m trying to use it for. RegisterBankInfo.h has this example mapping table: /// E.g., /// Let say we have a 32-bit add and a <2 x 32-bit> vadd. We /// can expand the /// <2 x 32-bit> add into

On 14 July 2016 at 20:07, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 7:58 AM, Pierre Gagelin via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am trying to use the CloneFunction from llvm/Transforms/Utils/Cloning.h > and I don't understand how the ValueToValueMapTy argument should be > initialized. For instance,

Hello Renato, It turned out I just didn't do the cross-compilation correctly, and Tim Northover already pointed me to a guide you have written on it ( http://clang.llvm.org/docs/CrossCompilation.html), so I will read that before continuing with my efforts. To answer your question I am testing on a pandaboard currently, which has an arm cortex-a9 processor, which I think is 64-bit. I am much

Hi, I've found a case I would expect would optimize easily, but it doesn't. A simple implementation of vector select: float4 simple_select(float4 a, float4 b, int4 c) { float4 result; result.x = c.x ? a.x : b.x; result.y = c.y ? a.y : b.y; result.z = c.z ? a.z : b.z; result.w = c.w ? a.w : b.w; return result; } I would expect this would be optimized to %bool

Have you tried running SLP vectorizer pass (-vectorize-slp)? Eugene On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I've found a case I would expect would optimize easily, but it doesn't. A > simple implementation of vector select: > > float4 simple_select(float4 a, float4 b, int4 c) > { > float4 result; >

Hi! I have discovered a problem with LLVM's interpretation of the Win64 calling convention w.r.t. passing of aggregates as arguments. The following code is part of my host application that is compiled with Visual Studio 2005 in 64-bit debug mode. noise4 expects a structure of four floats as its first and only argument, which is - in accordance with the specs of the Win64 calling convention -

I was investigating an error diagnostic in the following test example: typedef signed char char16 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(16))); void test( char16 srcA, char16 srcB, char16 *dst) { *dst = ( srcA == srcB ); } which produces the message: mismatch.c:5:10: error: assigning to 'char16' from incompatible type 'char __attribute__((ext_vector_type(16)))' *dst = (

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Daniel M Gessel <gessel at apple.com> wrote: > In Joe programmer language (i.e. C ;) ), are we basically talking > about disallowing: > > float4 a; > float* ptr_z = &a.z; > > ? That's my reading as well; the argument for not allowing it is just to make optimization easier. We don't allow addressing individual bits either,

Hi Martin, On Oct 2, 2013, at 6:25 AM, Martin O'Riordan <Martin.ORiordan at movidius.com> wrote: > I was investigating an error diagnostic in the following test example: > > typedef signed char char16 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(16))); > > void test( char16 srcA, char16 srcB, char16 *dst) { > *dst = ( srcA == srcB ); > } > > which produces the

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > I seem to recall havbing asked this before but I can't find it by searching. > > What's the right way to clone a Function? I need to save off the text at a > certain point and spit it out later, after other optimizations have run. But > I need to spit out the original text, not the optimized

In Joe programmer language (i.e. C ;) ), are we basically talking about disallowing: float4 a; float* ptr_z = &a.z; ? Won't programmers just resort to: float4 a; float* ptr_z = (float*)(&a) + 3; ? On Oct 14, 2008, at 3:55 PM, Mon Ping Wang wrote: > Hi, > > Something like a sequential type makes sense especially in light of > what Duncan is point out. I agree