Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release"
2013 Feb 07
0
[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release
Hi Ryan,
I think that it would be difficult to back port the CostModel back to LLVM3.0 because it uses the new TargetTransformInfo analysis. I also wanted to mention that only _lowering_ passes (target-specific optimization passes) may use TTI and the cost model. Higher-level canonicalization passes should not use it.
Thanks,
Nadav
On Feb 6, 2013, at 1:26 AM, ryan <stdstack at
2013 Feb 07
2
[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release
Thanks a lot for the reply, Nadav!
I see that using the cost model in target-independent analysis is not good.
But I really like the idea of having instruction
cost estimation available. Also the reason I can't directly move to 3.2
code base is that it fails to compile(produce bc files) big
project like MySQL, where 3.0 has no problem.
Right now, I'm trying to hard code a particular
2013 Feb 08
2
[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:17 PM, ryan <stdstack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks a lot for the reply, Nadav!
> > I see that using the cost model in target-independent analysis is not
> good. But I really like the idea of having instruction
> > cost estimation available. Also the
2013 Feb 07
0
[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release
On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:17 PM, ryan <stdstack at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the reply, Nadav!
> I see that using the cost model in target-independent analysis is not good. But I really like the idea of having instruction
> cost estimation available. Also the reason I can't directly move to 3.2 code base is that it fails to compile(produce bc files) big
> project
2013 Feb 08
0
[LLVMdev] CostModelAnalysis for 3.0 release
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:07:38PM -0800, ryan wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:17 PM, ryan <stdstack at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks a lot for the reply, Nadav!
> > > I see that using the cost model in target-independent analysis is not
> > good. But I
2014 Jul 17
4
[LLVMdev] Using CostModel to estimate machine cycles of each instruction
There is CostModel.cpp since LLVM3, I am wondering if anyone can give me
an concrete example on how to use this pass to estimate cycles used in a
given IR file.
Thank you very much.
Don
2015 Jan 14
6
[LLVMdev] Instruction Cost
Hi,
I'm looking for APIs that compute instruction costs, and noticed several of
them.
1. A series of APIs of TargetTransformInfo that compute the cost of
instructions of a particular type (e.g. getArithmeticInstrCost and
getShuffleCost)
2. TargetTransformInfo::getOperationCost
3. CostModel::getInstructionCost::getInstructionCost in
lib/Analysis/CostModel.cpp
Only the first one is used
2015 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Instruction Cost
CostModule::getInstructionCost also consults TTI (
http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/CostModel_8cpp_source.html#l00380). No?
Jingyue
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jingyue Wu <jingyue at google.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for APIs that compute instruction costs, and noticed
2016 Jan 05
3
TargetTransformInfo getOperationCost uses
Hi,
I'm trying to implement the TTI hooks for AMDGPU to avoid unrolling loops for operations with huge expansions (i.e. integer division).
The values that are ultimately reported by opt -cost-model -analyze (the actual cost model tests) seem to not matter for this. The huge cost I've assigned division doesn't prevent the loop from being unrolled, because it isn't actually
2016 Jun 05
2
What kind of testcases should be required to test IPRA?
Hello Mehdi Amini,
Sorry for slow progress this week but it was due to interesting mistake of
mine. I had build llvm with ipra enable by default and that build files
were on my path ! Due to that next time I tried to build llvm it was
terribly slow (almost 1 hour for 10% build ). I spend to much time on
fixing this by playing around with environment variables, cmake options etc.
But I think this
2015 May 04
2
[LLVMdev] AVX2 Cost Table in X86TargetTransformInfo
Hi all,
I have a query regarding Cost Table for AVX2 in TargetTransformInfo.
The table consist of entries for shift and div operations only. There are
no entries for ADD, SUB and MUL for AVX2 cost table. Those entries are
present in Cost Table for AVX.
The reason for query is - when my sub target feature is AVX2, in SLP
Vectorization, while calculating scalar cost of ADD, it doesn't see
2012 Dec 03
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] "noclone" function attribute
On Dec 1, 2012, at 11:49 PM, "Kuperstein, Michael M" <michael.m.kuperstein at intel.com> wrote:
> I definitely support this.
>
> In fact we were about to send a very similar proposal. The main difference I can see between this proposal and ours was that we named the attribute "noduplicate".
> I graciously defer to James on the bikeshade color issue.
Yes,
2015 May 04
3
[LLVMdev] AVX2 Cost Table in X86TargetTransformInfo
Thanks Nadav for the info. It clears my query :)
Yes its an integer ADD, and since AVX2 supports 256 bits integer
arithmetic, so its cost is less than AVX1.
One query though - shouldn't then the cost of integer ADD/SUB/MUL (which
would be 1) be explicitly specified in AVX2 cost table? Because right now
this entry is missing and cost of these operations are taken from BaseTTI
(which is
2012 Dec 03
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] "noclone" function attribute
On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
> 3) Please change random parts of the compiler to use CodeMetrics, instead of scattering random checks for this attribute throughout the code. Anything duplicating code and not using CodeMetrics is just plain incorrect.
One problem that we may run into when using CodeMetrics is compile time. In many cases we
2016 Jun 05
2
What kind of testcases should be required to test IPRA?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 4, 2016, at 7:56 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Mehdi Amini,
> >
> > Sorry for slow progress this week but it was due to interesting mistake
> of mine. I had build llvm with ipra enable by default and that build files
>
2015 Aug 05
2
Fwd: How to use CostModel?
Sorry if double posted... might have sent this to old mailing list
address...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Thomas <stephen.warner.thomas at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:39 AM
Subject: How to use CostModel?
To: LLVM Dev <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Hi,
I'm trying to use the built-in CostModel class to estimate the number of
machine instructions
2016 Jun 05
2
What kind of testcases should be required to test IPRA?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 4, 2016, at 8:32 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Jun 4, 2016, at 7:56 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
2012 Dec 03
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] "noclone" function attribute
Hi,
Thanks for the pointers. My patch now calls the attribute "noduplicate",
and updates CodeMetrics to have another field:
bool notDuplicatable;
Which semantically is "containsIndirectBr || containsNoDuplicateInst". I
didn't repurpose containsIndirectBr because I felt what I'm looking for
is sufficiently different (indirectbr inhibits inlining, whereas
noduplicate
2012 Dec 03
1
[LLVMdev] [RFC] "noclone" function attribute
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> 3) Please change random parts of the compiler to use CodeMetrics, instead
> of scattering random checks for this attribute throughout the code.
> Anything duplicating code and not using CodeMetrics is just plain
2012 Dec 04
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] "noclone" function attribute
Hi all + llvm-commits,
After the discussion below, please find attached my patch to add a new
"noduplicate" function attribute.
I've modified CodeMetrics and LoopInfo, which covers most cases, but
JumpThreading and InlineCost don't use CodeMetrics yet, so they required
changing manually.
Cheers,
James
On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 23:46 +0000, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 3,