similar to: invariant.load metadata semantics

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hal Finkel via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: "Geoff Berry" <gberry at codeaurora.org> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 3:05:48 PM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] invariant.load metadata semantics > ----- Original Message ----- > >

I have the following matrix: > dat [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] foo 0.7574657 0.2104075 0.02922241 0.002705617 foo 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.000000000 foo 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.000000000 foo 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.000000000 foo 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.000000000 foo 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.000000000 and given this:

Thank You, It means vmovdqa64 zmm22, zmmword ptr [rip + .LCPI0_0] # zmm22 = [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15] zmm22 will contain 64 bit constant values which are indexes here zmm22=8, 9, 10, 11, 12,13,14,15. not the values loaded from these locations. and zmm2 contains constant 4000. so, vpmuludq zmm14, zmm10, zmm2 ; will multiply the indexes values with 4000, as for array b the stride is 4000. zmm14=

Dear R-mates, # Here's what I am trying to do. I have a dataset like this: id = c(rep(1,8), rep(2,8)) dur1 <- c( 17,18,19,18,24,19,24,24 ) est1 <- c( rep(1,5), rep(2,3) ) dur2 <- c(1,1,3,4,8,12,13,14) est2 <- rep(1,8) mydata = data.frame(id, estat=c(est1, est2), durat=c(dur1, dur2)) # I want to one have this: id = c(rep(1,8), rep(2,8))

Hi Hal, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev wrote: > Some questions: Do we allow stores to these locations at all? Only if I'd vote for disallowing stores to these locations, but if "stores allowed only if the value is the same" is helpful in some situation then I don't have specific reasons why that would be problematic. > the value is the same? Must any change be observable to

I'm looking at how to optimize IR which contains reads from a field which is known to be initialized exactly once. I've got an idea on how to approach this, but wanted to see if others have alternate ideas or similar problems which might spark discussion. It feels like there's a potentially generally useful optimization hint here if we can generalize it sufficiently without

> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hal Finkel via llvm-dev > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] invariant.load metadata semantics > Alternatively, we might phrase this as: The optimizer may assume that all values loaded > from a location, where any of the loads are tagged with !invariant.load, are identical. This would seem to limit the usefulness of the

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 4:25 PM Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > This is going OT from the original thread, but, what the heck... > Sorry, not my intention, I was just giving another reason why getting promotion done in LICM differently would be helpful. > Alina, can you explain the challenge with implementing promotion over > MemorySSA? On the surface, it

> On Dec 1, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > (Spawning a separate subthread off the 'Optimization hints for "constant" loads' discussion for a related question. ) > > Looking at TBAA again, I was reminded that TBAA also contains a third field which indicates that "meaning pointsToConstantMemory should return

Hi, I am trying to find the fastest way to "find the last index k such that x[k] < y in a *sorted* vector x" These are my two alternatives: x <- sort(rnorm(1e4)) y <- 0.2 # Alt 1 k <- max(1, sum(x < y)) # Alt 2 "divide and conquer" lastIndexLessThan <- function(x, y) { k0 <- 1; k1 <- length(x) while ((dk <- (k1 - k0)) >

I've put my changes to EarlyCSE that trigger this case up on phab here: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19821. These changes depend on http://reviews.llvm.org/D19664 so that will need to be applied first. With these changes applied, the original attached .ll file should trigger this bug when compiled with opt -early-cse -early-cse-use-memoryssa On 5/2/2016 2:34 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >

I suspect something is pulling the RHS of the memorydef and caching it for calls it should not be used for. In particular, i suspect we are about to discover we can't cache the results from both versions of getClobberingMemoryAccess together, or that the cache is not always getting consistently written. On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:16 AM, George Burgess IV < george.burgess.iv at

Hi Daniel, Daniel Berlin wrote: > To be specific, does this imply "if we see a store, we can assume it is > of the same value the load already has"? > > IE if i have: > > func() > { > load a, invariant.load !1 > <use of a> > store a, 5 > } > > Can i assume that a in <use of a> has the value 5? Yes, that is what I had in

Hi guys, I think I have run into another CachingMemorySSAWalker cache bug. It's a bit tricky to reproduce, so I'd like to start by trying to show you what is happening when running EarlyCSE with my local changes to use MemorySSA. I've attached a debug log that shows that the value returned by getClobberingMemoryAccess(Inst) after a call to removeMemoryAccess is wrong. The

Hi.. i have an expression of the form: model1<-nls(y~beta1*(x1+(k1*x2)+(k1*k1*x3)+(k2*x4)+(k2*k1*x5)+(k2*k2*x6)+(k3*x7)+(k3*k4*x8)+(k3*k2*x9)+(k3*k3*x10)+ (k4*x11)+(k4*k1*x12)+(k4*k2*x13)+(k4*k3*x14)+(k4*k4*x15)+(k5*x16)+(k5*k1*x17)+(k5*k2*x18)+(k5*k3*x19)+

On 10/20/2016 9:28 AM, Cameron McInally via llvm-dev wrote: > I should have attached the generated asm to save some trouble. > Apologies for that and attaching now... > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Cameron McInally > <cameron.mcinally at nyu.edu> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:

Hi everyone! I'm matching two samples to create one sample that have pairs of observations equal for the k1 variable. Merge() doesn't work because I dont't want to recycle the values. x <- data.frame(k1=c(1,1,2,3,3,5), k2=c(20,21,22,23,24,25)) x y <- data.frame(k1=c(1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5), k2=c(10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17)) y merge(x,y,by="k1") k1 k2.x k2.y 1 1 20

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Oct 20, 2016, at 8:54 AM, Cameron McInally via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hey guys, >> >> I've hit a pretty nasty issue on SKX with ANDs of masks <= 4 bits. >> >> In the IR, we represent a 4b vector mask as <4 x i1>.

I believe the following is a reasonable attempt at boiling down this discussion. It does allow stores of the same value. It avoids the dead invariant.load issue Sanjoy brought up. It does not allow final stores of a different value, the issue Hal most recently brought up in this thread: If a load instruction tagged with the ``!invariant.load`` metadata is executed, the optimizer may

Hi George, After digging a little deeper, it appears that readonly calls showing up as MemoryDefs is only happening on an EarlyCSE test that is using the new pass manager (test/Transforms/EarlyCSE/basic.ll test5 if you’re curious), so I suspect it is an issue with the new pass manager setup code for either MemorySSA, my changes to EarlyCSE, the test run command line or something else not