similar to: [LLVMdev] Gather load in LLVM IR

Hi Evan, all, The most obvious thing to me would be to extend the load instruction to have an additional form that takes a vector of pointers instead of a single pointer. This form would return a vector of values instead of a single value. If a gather instruction is not available on the target, then the load could be lowered to a series of scalar loads and insertelements. Thanks, Nick On

Hi All, I was wondering if there is an optimisation pass that moves a stack allocated array, initialised with constant values, to a global constant array. And if there is such a pass, what requirements are there for it to operate? My optimised IR is below. As you can see an array of 5 integers is created with alloca, then each element is stored to in turn. It would be nice if this array was

Hi all, I am using gather intrinsic to load a value from the same address twice at the same time. Basically, I used my own pass to changed the following bitcode: %a = getelementptr inbounds [100 x double], [100 x double]* %A, i32, 0, i64 0 %1 = load double, double* a, align to: %a = getelementptr inbounds [100 x double], [100 x double]* %A, i32, 0, i64 0 %splat.a = insertelement <2 x

----- Original Message ----- > "Rotem, Nadav" <nadav.rotem at intel.com> writes: > > > David, > > > > Thanks for the support! I sent a detailed email with the overall > > plan. But just to reiterate, the GEP would look like this: > > > > %PV = getelementptr <4 x i32*> %base, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 2, i32 > > 3, i32

> On Jan 20, 2016, at 12:59 PM, Tim Northover via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Zhi, > > On 18 January 2016 at 11:28, zhi chen via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Any idea about this error? Or could anyone give me an example how to use the >> gather intrinsic if there is something wrong with the way I am using it?

Hi, I used clang -O3 -c -emit-llvm on the follow code to generate a bitcode, say a.bc. I read the .ll file and didn't see any gather intrinsic. Also, I used opt -O3 -mcpu=core-avx2/-mcpu=skx, but there is still no gather intrinsic generated. int foo(int A[800], int B[800], int C[800]) { for (int i = 0; i < 800; i++) { A[B[i]] = i + 5; } for (int i = 0; i < 800;

Yes, indeed I can always fallback to intrinsics. But still, I believe that the case I described is in its essence quite common-place, so it should be a first-class citizen in the LLVM IR. AVX2 is the target ISA I'm thinking of too BTW. Let's forget 3D, and imagine something as trivial as a vectorized i32 => float table look up. I'd expect that the IR would look something like:

Thanks for your response, Sanjay. I know there are intrinsics available in C/C++. But the problem is that I want to instrument my code at the IR level and generate those instructions. I don't want to touch the source code. Best, Zhi On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> wrote: > I was just looking at the related masked load/store operations, and

Yes, masked load/store/gather/scatter are completed. - Elena From: zhi chen [mailto:zchenhn at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 01:20 To: Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com> Cc: Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>; Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] how to

It seems that http://reviews.llvm.org/D15690 only implemented gather/scatter for AVX-512, but not for AVX/AVX2. Is there any plan to enable gather for AVX/2? Thanks. Best, Zhi On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> wrote: > I don't think gather has been enabled for AVX2 as of r261875. > Masked load/store were enabled for AVX with: >

I don't think gather has been enabled for AVX2 as of r261875. Masked load/store were enabled for AVX with: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16528 / http://reviews.llvm.org/rL258675 On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Demikhovsky, Elena < elena.demikhovsky at intel.com> wrote: > Yes, masked load/store/gather/scatter are completed. > > > > - * Elena* > > > >

The frontend would generate the load in the IR. I am using IRBuilder to generate gather. I know it is mainly for discontinuous memory locations. It's a long story why I want to use this. I want to gather some memory locations. Suppose there are an array A, I manually duplicated it somewhere with an offset x. Now, we have two arrays A and A', where A'[i] - A[i] = offset. I want to

Hi Jose, The proposed IR change does not contribute nor hinder the usecase you mentioned. The case of a base + vector-index should be easily addressed by an intrinsic. The pointer-vector proposal comes to support full scatter/gather instructions (such as the AVX2 gather instructions). Nadav -----Original Message----- From: Jose Fonseca [mailto:jfonseca at vmware.com] Sent: Tuesday, November

No. Gather operation is slow on AVX2 processors. - Elena From: zhi chen [mailto:zchenhn at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 20:48 To: Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> Cc: Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>; Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] how to force

Thanks Sanjay for highlighting this, few days back I also faced similar problem while generating masked store in avx1 mode, found its only supported under avx2 else we scalarize it. > 1) I did not switch-on masked_load/store to AVX1, I can do this. Yes Elena, This should be supported for FP type in avx1 mode (for INT type, I doubt X86 has masked_load/store instruction in avx1 mode).

Ø Can we legalize the same set of masked load/store operations for AVX1 as AVX2? Yes, of course. - Elena From: Sanjay Patel [mailto:spatel at rotateright.com] Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 18:42 To: Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> Cc: Demikhovsky, Elena <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>; zhi chen <zchenhn at gmail.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

If I'm understanding correctly, you're saying that vgather* is slow on all of Excavator, Haswell, Broadwell, and Skylake (client). Therefore, we will not generate it for any of those machines. Even if that's true, we should not define "gatherIsSlow()" as "hasAVX2() && !hasAVX512()". It could break for some hypothetical future processor that manages to

Hi Elena, Are the masked_load and gather working now? Best, Zhi On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Demikhovsky, Elena < elena.demikhovsky at intel.com> wrote: > Ø Can we legalize the same set of masked load/store operations for AVX1 > as AVX2? > > Yes, of course. > > > > - * Elena* > > > > *From:* Sanjay Patel [mailto:spatel at

That makes great sense. It would be great if we have profitability mode to see the necessity to use gathers. Or it also would be good if there is a compiler option for the users to enable LLVM to generate the gather instructions no matter it is faster or slow. Best, Zhi On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> wrote: > If I'm understanding

Eli, I understand the need to widen unsigned types. However, I ran into a problem with the current GEP/subscript that clang has. AVX2 gather instructions rely on a 64-bit base pointer and a vector of 32-bit indices. Usually, when vectorizing programs, it is possible to detect that the GEP base pointer is uniform and that the index is variant (and needs to be vectorized). This works really nice