[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |6.0 --- Comment #26 from Andrew Pinski --- Fixed for GCC 6 by r6-4443. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-11.2.0/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html#index-target_005fclones-function-attribute
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Roland Schulz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roland at rschulz dot eu --- Comment #25 from Roland Schulz --- I believe this can be closed because this has been implemented as target_clones attribute.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sun, 25 May 2014, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch changed: What|Removed |Added Version|4.7.0 |4.9.1 --- Comment #21 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch --- is Auto Cloning foreseen to be included anytime soon? It looks to me that it is not yet supported in gcc 4.9.0 It's supported in 4.9.0, but AFAIK only for x86 and C (or was it C++?). Richard.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch ---
Which Syntax?
I want to reuse the same code for the various architecture and let gcc deal
with vectorization details.
The best I manage to do to share code is something like this
namespace {
inline
float _sum0(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
float sum=0;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
sum += z[i]+x[i]*y[i];
return sum;
}
}
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (arch=haswell)))
sum1(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
return _sum0(x,y,z);
}
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (arch=nehalem)))
sum1(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
return _sum0(x,y,z);
}
//--
this for instance does not work (produce code only for haswell)
float __attribute__ ( (__target__(arch=nehalem), __target__(arch=haswell))
)
sum0(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
float sum=0;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
sum += z[i]+x[i]*y[i];
return sum;
}
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 26 May 2014, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
---
Which Syntax?
I want to reuse the same code for the various architecture and let gcc deal
with vectorization details.
The best I manage to do to share code is something like this
namespace {
inline
float _sum0(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
float sum=0;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
sum += z[i]+x[i]*y[i];
return sum;
}
}
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (arch=haswell)))
sum1(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
return _sum0(x,y,z);
}
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (arch=nehalem)))
sum1(float const * x,
float const * y, float const * z) {
return _sum0(x,y,z);
}
I think that's the desired interface (it was designed with the
expectation you'd use intrinsics in the special functions, not
simply let the autovectorizer do its work IIRC).
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch changed: What|Removed |Added Version|4.7.0 |4.9.1 --- Comment #21 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch --- is Auto Cloning foreseen to be included anytime soon? It looks to me that it is not yet supported in gcc 4.9.0
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #17 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
2012-05-10 10:16:13 UTC ---
I tested this
float x[1024], y[1024], z[1024], w[1024];
void foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(avx))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
and see the three versions generated + the resolver.
As you notice the source code is identical as I'm exploiting compiler
autovectorization here.
In this case I was hoping that a single declaration such as __attribute__
((target(arch=corei7,avx)))
or __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7),target(avx))) would generate the two
versions w/o hang to duplicate the source code.
Is this possible to support?
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #18 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2012-05-10
16:48:45 UTC ---
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:16 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #17 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
2012-05-10 10:16:13 UTC ---
I tested this
float x[1024], y[1024], z[1024], w[1024];
void foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(avx))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
and see the three versions generated + the resolver.
As you notice the source code is identical as I'm exploiting compiler
autovectorization here.
In this case I was hoping that a single declaration such as __attribute__
((target(arch=corei7,avx)))
or __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7),target(avx))) would generate the
two
versions w/o hang to duplicate the source code.
Is this possible to support?
Yes, this is on the list of things to add. The front-end should clone
the bodies and tag the attributes appropriately.
Thanks,
-Sri,
--
Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #19 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-10 16:51:33 UTC --- On 10 May, 2012, at 6:48 PM, tmsriram at google dot com wrote: As you notice the source code is identical as I'm exploiting compiler autovectorization here. In this case I was hoping that a single declaration such as __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7,avx))) or __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7),target(avx))) would generate the two versions w/o hang to duplicate the source code. Is this possible to support? Yes, this is on the list of things to add. The front-end should clone the bodies and tag the attributes appropriately. good. Let me know when available, I wil test it with even longer code! v. Thanks, -Sri,
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #20 from davidxl xinliangli at gmail dot com 2012-05-10 20:45:58
UTC ---
Auto Cloning is an independent feature. What is requested here is an extension
of a previous auto clone patch by Sri (which is based on command line option
-mversion=...).
David
(In reply to comment #18)
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:16 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #17 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
2012-05-10 10:16:13 UTC ---
I tested this
float x[1024], y[1024], z[1024], w[1024];
void foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
void __attribute__ ((target(avx))) foo() {
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
x[i]=y[i]*z[i]+w[i];
}
and see the three versions generated + the resolver.
As you notice the source code is identical as I'm exploiting compiler
autovectorization here.
In this case I was hoping that a single declaration such as __attribute__
((target(arch=corei7,avx)))
or __attribute__ ((target(arch=corei7),target(avx))) would generate the
two
versions w/o hang to duplicate the source code.
Is this possible to support?
Yes, this is on the list of things to add. The front-end should clone
the bodies and tag the attributes appropriately.
Thanks,
-Sri,
--
Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #16 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2012-05-09 19:03:01 UTC --- Bug fixed, patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00694.html Thanks for trying, -Sri. On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 2:18 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-08 09:18:01 UTC --- added your patch on top of c++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=c++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.8.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib : (reconfigured) ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib CC=gcc CXX=g++ --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto --no-create --no-recursion Thread model: posix gcc version 4.8.0 20120508 (experimental) [trunk revision 187276] (GCC) configured as above ad got ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [lto1] Error 1 make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1] Error 1 ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1plus] Error 1 rm gcov.pod cpp.pod gfdl.pod fsf-funding.pod gcc.pod make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk/host-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc' make[2]: *** [all-stage1-gcc] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make: *** [all] Error 2 -- Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-08 09:18:01 UTC --- added your patch on top of c++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=c++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.8.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib : (reconfigured) ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib CC=gcc CXX=g++ --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto --no-create --no-recursion Thread model: posix gcc version 4.8.0 20120508 (experimental) [trunk revision 187276] (GCC) configured as above ad got ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [lto1] Error 1 make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1] Error 1 ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1plus] Error 1 rm gcov.pod cpp.pod gfdl.pod fsf-funding.pod gcc.pod make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk/host-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc' make[2]: *** [all-stage1-gcc] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make: *** [all] Error 2
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #15 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2012-05-08 17:09:43 UTC --- On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 2:18 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-08 09:18:01 UTC --- added your patch on top of c++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=c++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.8.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib : (reconfigured) ./configure --prefix=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2 -enable-gold=yes --enable-lto --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --with-gmp-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --with-mpfr-lib=/usr/local/lib64 -with-mpc-lib=/usr/local/lib64 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-cloog=/usr/local --with-ppl-lib=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib CC=gcc CXX=g++ --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto --no-create --no-recursion Thread model: posix gcc version 4.8.0 20120508 (experimental) [trunk revision 187276] (GCC) configured as above ad got ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [lto1] Error 1 make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' Thanks, I will fix this asap. collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1] Error 1 ../.././gcc/multiversion.c:613: error: undefined reference to 'cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1plus] Error 1 rm gcov.pod cpp.pod gfdl.pod fsf-funding.pod gcc.pod make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk/host-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc' make[2]: *** [all-stage1-gcc] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/data/newsoft/gcc-trunk' make: *** [all] Error 2 -- Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #11 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-07 13:05:18 UTC --- Please post on this PR when a version of 4.8 exists that supports the feature (I saw several patches proposed and even committed)
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #12 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2012-05-07 16:54:57 UTC --- Will do, thanks. -Sri. On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:05 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #11 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-05-07 13:05:18 UTC --- Please post on this PR when a version of 4.8 exists that supports the feature (I saw several patches proposed and even committed) -- Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #13 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2012-05-07 17:04:05 UTC --- Here is the patch to do function multiversioning which is under review: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00078.html
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #7 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-10-28 09:06:30 UTC --- sorry to ping again. Stage 1 is supposed to end Nov 7th. Will the new feature work out by Sri make for 4.7?
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2011-10-28 09:14:29 UTC --- On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #7 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-10-28 09:06:30 UTC --- sorry to ping again. Stage 1 is supposed to end Nov 7th. Will the new feature work out by Sri make for 4.7? No
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-10-28 14:00:18 UTC --- That's a pity. It would be very useful though to have at least a patch to test so that we can have something to use in prototypes and eventually a working solution for 4.8
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #10 from Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com 2011-10-28 17:28:23 UTC --- On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:00 AM, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-10-28 14:00:18 UTC --- That's a pity. It would be very useful though to have at least a patch to test so that we can have something to use in prototypes and eventually a working solution for 4.8 Still working on it. Will keep you posted as soon as I have a patch to test. -- Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-07-23 13:29:36 UTC --- Any news on this item? Is this feature still foreseen for 4.7? A patch to test for instance.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #6 from davidxl xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-07-23 17:28:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Any news on this item? Is this feature still foreseen for 4.7? A patch to test for instance. Sri is working on this. He will post a formal specification of feature soon. Part of the proposal also includes implementation of the MV runtime support (runtime initialization to determine cpu topology and intrinsics to query) and command line option extensions. David
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
2011-06-11 05:58:46 UTC ---
These new developments sound interesting. Hope somebody is working on it and
will publish a testable version soon.
On the other hand I was thinking more of exploiting auto-vectorization for
which having multiple copy of the very same code looks to me not necessary and
error prone, Something for instance along these line
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (sse2,sse3,avx,fma)))
sum0(float const * __restrict__ x,
float const * __restrict__ y, float const * __restrict__ z) {
float sum=0;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
sum += z[i]+x[i]*y[i];
return sum;
}
If my understanding of the proposal is correct I will have to copy-paste this
function four times, one for each target.
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363
davidxl xinliangli at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tmsriram at google dot com
--- Comment #3 from davidxl xinliangli at gmail dot com 2011-06-11 06:23:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
These new developments sound interesting. Hope somebody is working on it and
will publish a testable version soon.
On the other hand I was thinking more of exploiting auto-vectorization for
which having multiple copy of the very same code looks to me not necessary and
error prone, Something for instance along these line
float __attribute__ ((__target__ (sse2,sse3,avx,fma)))
sum0(float const * __restrict__ x,
float const * __restrict__ y, float const * __restrict__ z) {
float sum=0;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
sum += z[i]+x[i]*y[i];
return sum;
}
If my understanding of the proposal is correct I will have to copy-paste this
function four times, one for each target.
The overloading proposal works for both manual versioning and automatic
versioning.
For manual versioning:
// generic version
void foo()
{
}
void foo() __attribute((dispatch_selector(v1))
{
}
void foo() __attribute((dispatch_selector(v2))
{
}
void bar()
{
foo(); --- becomes a three way dispatching
...
}
Here both the version and dispatcher ARE defined by the user.
However, without specifying any attribute for the generic version of foo, the
compiler can also version it automatically according to command line option
that specifies the target hardwares the binary is going to be run.
For your case, the standard CPU feature is specified,
void __attribute__((__target__(sse2, avx, fma)) foo ()
{ ... }
it is the same as the auto version case mentioned above -- the difference is
that the function to be versioned is determined by the user, not the compiler.
David
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 --- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-06-11 07:06:24 UTC --- Thanks for the clarification, waiting for some patch/branch to test. please keep me posted (or let me know with PR I shall watch).
[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2011.06.10 12:42:03 CC||dnovillo at gcc dot ||gnu.org, rguenth at gcc dot ||gnu.org, xinliangli at ||gmail dot com Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-10 12:42:03 UTC --- See the thread starting at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg02285.html (continuing in May). Eventually we agreed that the user-side could be done by a kind of function overload resolution of properly tagged functions (proposed in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00150.html). No idea if there is anybody working on it.
