similar to: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > To: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 1:30:57 PM > Subject: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > Hi, > > I've been working on clang codegen for #pragma ivdep and creating the >

Hal, (and everyone who might care about post increment generation)... I have an interesting question/observation. Consider this vector loop. void vec_add_const(unsigned N, short __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) *A, short __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) val) { unsigned i,j; for (i=0; i<N; i++) { for (j=0; j<N; j++) { A[i*N+j] += val; } } } The

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sergei Larin" <slarin at codeaurora.org> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:24:39 AM > Subject: Interesting post increment situation in DAG combiner > > Hal, (and everyone who might care about post increment generation)... Sergei, Perhaps

Hal, Here is my patch for the post inc case. I think it is symmetrically applicable to the pre-inc, but I have not tested it for that. I think you can clearly see my intent here - I simply select the "latest" candidate when multiple are available. Who else might be interested in this? Sergei --- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The

Dear all, Attached notunrolled.ll is a module containing reduction kernel. What I'm trying to do is to unroll it in such way, that partial reduction on unrolled iterations would be performed on register, and then stored to memory only once. Currently llvm's unroller together with all standard optimizations produce code, which stores value to memory after every unrolled iteration, which is

I tried to manually assign each of 3 arrays a unique TBAA node. But it does not seem to help: alias analysis still considers arrays as may-alias, which most likely prevents the desired optimization. Below is the sample code with TBAA metadata inserted. Could you please suggest what might be wrong with it? Many thanks, - D. marcusmae at M17xR4:~/forge/llvm$ opt -time-passes -enable-tbaa -tbaa

Hi Hal, On 2013-02-28, at 9:33 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> >> To: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 1:30:57 PM >> Subject: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification >> >> Hi, >>

On 2013-03-01, at 11:35 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> >> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> >> Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:06:51 AM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop

Hi Paul, On 02/28/2013 09:30 PM, Redmond, Paul wrote: > I'd like to reopen the discussion on requiring the > llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access metadata. I understand the reason for the > metadata is to protect against transformations that may introduce unsafe > parallel memory accesses (the reg2mem example.) I'm wondering if perhaps we > can make the metadata more user-friendly

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:06:51 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > Hi Hal, > > On 2013-02-28, at 9:33

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:49:24 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > > On 2013-03-01, at 11:35 AM, Hal

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > To: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 11:13:06 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > ----- Original Message ----- > >

Hi, I have a general question on LoopUnswtich pass. Consider the following IR snippet: define i32 @test(i1 %cond) { br label %loop_begin loop_begin: br i1 %cond, label %loop_body, label %loop_exit loop_body: br label %do_something do_something: call void @some_func() noreturn nounwind br label %loop_begin loop_exit: ret i32 0 } declare void @some_func() noreturn After running

Hi, I'd like to construct an R list object in C++, fill it with relevant data, and pass it to an R function which will return a different list object back. I have browsed through all the R manuals, and examples under tests/Embedding, but can't figure out the correct way. Below is my code snippet: #include <Rinternals.h> // Rf_initEmbeddedR and other setups already performed

Hello All, I recently upgraded from R-1.1.1 to R-1.2.2. I have an R function that uses .Call() to return a list from C code. The C code has the form: SEXP function(SEXP var) { SEXP rlist ; PROTECT(rlist = NEW_LIST(3)) ; VECTOR_PTR(rlist)[0] = NEW_INTEGER(1) ; VECTOR_PTR(rlist)[1] = NEW_STRING(1) ; ... UNPROTECT(1) ; return(rlist) ; } When I try to

On 05/23/2013 06:52 PM, Redmond, Paul wrote: > I'm not even sure you would need the llvm.loop.parallel anymore since the > vectorizer could just look to see if the loop id on a parallel_loop_access > matches the loop id of the loop being vectorized. > > Does this make any sense? Yes. However, I think you still need use the self-referencing metadata trick or similar to make the

Dear all, Here's an updated version of the parallel loop metadata patch. It includes documentation for the new metadata types with a semantics description. -- Pekka -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: parallel-loop-metadata.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 12972 bytes Desc: not available URL:

Adam, Please find the attached test case (run with ToT opt -O3). As you can see, `y_body` successfully is vectorized, though %33 and %46 are deemed MayAlias despite their exclusive use in loads ands stores marked with `llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access`. Many Thanks, Josh On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:43 AM,

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Pekka Jääskeläinen <pekka.jaaskelainen at tut.fi> wrote: > Thank you all for comments, > > > On 01/30/2013 11:22 AM, David Tweed wrote: >> >> In a personal capacity I'm quite interested in the issues of producing >> from a >> high-level language some LLVM IR which is labelled with vectorization info >> (including

It seems that at some point in the not-so-distant-past that the loop vectorizer gained the ability to vectorize loops without explicit `llvm.loop` & `llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access` metadata. While that's awesome, there seems to be a regression in that `llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access` metadata doesn't make it into the alias analysis, and therefore a `vector.memcheck` basic block is