similar to: [LLVMdev] OpenMP/autopar support in LLVM

On 07/04/2012 10:35 AM, Raghavendra, Prakash wrote: > Hi > > I wanted to know the status of OpenMP (or in general auto > parallelization) support in > > LLVM. > > I read some threads discussing about possible effort in that direction > in 3.1 onwards, > > but did not see any further discussion on that. > > If someone in the list knows the updated info or can

Hi Tobi Thanks a lot for your detailed update on the status of OpenMP in LLVM. It looks like there is no "official" support of OpenMP in LLVM 3.x at least. In your descriptive list, I can see that [a] is an optional patch or available in GCC, [b] & [c] are available as optional runtimes (which have to be carefully bundled). [d] anyway is little different from OpenMP (can exist

Hi, I just have a detail look at the code of Polly[1], it seems that Polly start to support some basic auto-parallelization stuffs. I have some idea to improve the current auto-vectorization and parallelization approach in Polly. The main idea is, we separate the transform passes and codegen passes for auto-parallelization and vectorization (Graphite[2] for gcc seems to taking similar approach

Hello, I am a masters student interested in parallelization API's and auto parallelization. I have been following LLVM's development for some time now and would like to make a contribution. In particular I am interested in adding OpenMP support for LLVM. I believe this will be useful both for clang as well as LLVM Polly. I would like to know if anyone is already working on this. Any

Hi yes, I'm asking for any advice, I want to implement multithreaded code generator in LLVM. tnx --- On Tue, 10/5/10, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: From: Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Multithreaded code generation To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Date: Tuesday, October 5, 2010, 10:50 AM Hi Hamed, > I want to use LLVM to automatically

Hi all, Sorry for having been quiet for so long, I have my university exams going on, and will be able to contribute only after the coming Friday. Thanks! -- Sanjoy Das http://playingwithpointers.com

On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 6:08 AM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Sorry for having been quiet for so long, I have my university exams > going on, and will be able to contribute only after the coming Friday. Gents, While you've been fooling around with exams, I have been focused with laser-like intensity, or something... Here are new versions of 4 SIV

Hi Hal I was also looking at providing such a support in LLVM for capturing (both explicit and implicit) parallelism in LLVM. We had an initial discussion around this and your proposal comes at the right time. We support such an initiative. We can work together to get this support implemented in LLVM. But, I have a slight different view. I think today parallelism does not necessarily mean OpenMP

On Mon, 14 May 2012 13:54:19 -0700 Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > > Can you explain this comment: > > > With minor algebra, this test can also be used for things like > > > [c1 + a1*i + a2*j][c2]. > > It's really too simple to deserve mention...

Hello; I saw a discussion went i the llvm mailing list about work on supporting OpenMP in Clang (llvm-gcc already supports that).( http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-January/046640.html) I just want to know, anybody has made any progress in it? It would be really helpful for me. Thanks a lot; -- Arnamoy Bhattacharyya Athabasca Hall 143 Department of Computing Science -

On 01/16/2012 03:04 AM, Vlad Krylov wrote: > I am interested. I would be grateful for your hints. Great. ;-) > So OpenMP has various constructs such as parallel, barrier, single, > for, etc. And there is at least two libraries to generate OpenMP code: > libgomp and mpc. We want to be independent of specific library. True. > We should create an interface with methods which

On 10/05/2010 09:42 AM, hamed hamzehi wrote: > Hi > yes, I'm asking for any advice, I want to implement multithreaded code > generator in LLVM. > tnx Hi, this generally depends which kind of code you want to multithread, because generally this is a difficult problem. However, if you limit yourself for the moment to loops that fit into the polyhedral model, you can take

Hi, suppose the following C function declaration: void f(int *in, int *out); Now further suppose, that _in_ is an array only read from and _out_ is an array that is only written to. Based on this, I was wondering whether there is some already existing LLVM pass (or maybe a part of a pass) that detects those "data directions" for pointers. I'm not quite sure whether e.g. Alias

On 01/06/2011 03:38 AM, ether zhhb wrote: > Hi, > > I just have a detail look at the code of Polly[1], it seems that Polly > start to support some basic auto-parallelization stuffs. This is true. However still work in progress. I hope we can soon show some interesting results. > I have some idea to improve the current auto-vectorization > and parallelization approach in

On 10/19/2010 05:50 AM, Gautam B.T. wrote: > Hello, > > I am a masters student interested in parallelization API's and auto > parallelization. I have been following LLVM's development for some time now > and would like to make a contribution. In particular I am interested in > adding > OpenMP support for LLVM. I believe this will be useful both for clang as > well

Hi Dmitry, On 01/09/2013 03:48 PM, Dmitry Mikushin wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > This kind of analysis is a pretty complex problem in general case. > Consider, for instance, function "f" has nested calls of other functions > with "side effects", meaning they could potentially change the contents of > "in" or "out" indirectly. For this

On 15 August 2012 11:04, Raghavendra, Prakash <Prakash.Raghavendra at amd.com> wrote: > My idea is to capture parallelism with the way you have said using > ‘metadata’. I agree to record the parallel regions in the metadata (as given by the user). However, we > could also give placeholders to record any additional information that the compiler writer needs like > number of

On Mon, 14 May 2012 11:46:02 -0700 Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 6:08 AM, Sanjoy Das > <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > > > Sorry for having been quiet for so long, I have my university exams > > going on, and will be able to contribute only after the coming > > Friday. > > Gents, >

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: >> > One thing that I would like to mention is that 'use' here should >> > also include user feedback. This means being able to pass >> > information back to the frontends about which loops are being >> > effectively analyzed, and for loops that are not, why not. >>

Hi, I want to execute the iterations of a loop in parallel, by inserting calls either to pthreads or to the gomp library at the LLVM IR level. As a first step, I inserted an omp pragma in a C file and compiled it with llvm-gcc to check the generated LLVM code. If I understand correctly, to parallelize the loop in LLVM IR, I have to separate the loop in a new function, put all required parameters