Hi Richard,
Thank you for the suggestion. I see that your patch is merged into trunk.
But I am still not sure that if we can pass "ivdep" to RTL. Can you shed
light on this please ?
For me, I want to do something on RTL with the loop pragma information.
Cheers,
Fei.
>
> On Mon,
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014, Matthew Fortune wrote:
> Yes this is a lot simpler than the 3rd mode but disabling the NAN2008 ELF
> Flag checks is even more honest as that is what would happen at the
> kernel-userland boundary anyway, so why enforce it elsewhere.
>
> I know I am pushing hard on this topic
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Matthew Fortune writes:
> > Maciej W. Rozycki writes:
> >> On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >>
> >> > > Thanks Joseph. I guess I'm not really pushing to have don't-care
> >> > > supported as it would take a lot of effort to determine when code
> >> > >
> Look at how we implement #pragma ivdep (see replace_loop_annotate ()
> and fortran/trans-stmt.c where it builds ANNOTATE_EXPR).
Note that the C and C++ front-ends also support it.
We are planning to submit a patch to add more loop pragmas as soon as stage #1
opens, so the design could as well b
On 24/03/14 04:44, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/22/14 05:29, Richard Hulme wrote:
On 22/03/14 01:47, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/21/14 18:35, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've found that "removing uneeded moves through registers" is
something gcc does poorly in the post-reload optimizers. I've written
my own on som
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>I've been solving undefined symbols related to:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/PR57703. In chromium there's a following inline asm:
>
> asm(".type Syscall, @function\n" ...);
>
> intptr_t SandboxSyscall(...)
> {
>asm volatile("call SyscallAsm")
Hello,
The General Optimizer Improvements for GCC-4.9 states that function
bodies
are now loaded on-demand and released early improving overall memory
usage
at link time.
Even on searching for the implementation of this feature in the source
code, I was unable to find where this has been imple
Hello,
I've been solving undefined symbols related to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR57703. In chromium there's a following inline asm:
asm(".type Syscall, @function\n" ...);
intptr_t SandboxSyscall(...)
{
asm volatile("call SyscallAsm");
}
Where call of SandboxSyscall is inlined in couple of fu
On 03/24/2014 02:08 PM, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
Hi,
1. Maybe there is also an opportunity to improve the design of Graphite
code generation, this will give you another benefit - code more robust, easier
to maintain and extend.
I suggest a design where the code generation from ISL AST is based
on
Hi,
1. Maybe there is also an opportunity to improve the design of Graphite
code generation, this will give you another benefit - code more robust, easier
to maintain and extend.
I suggest a design where the code generation from ISL AST is based
on attributes (properties) of the ISL AST nodes.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm thinking of the right way of adding some loop related pragmas to GCC.
> An example:
>
> #pragma loop unroll = 2
> for (i = 0; i < n; i ++)
> {
> Whatever...
> }
>
> Here I want
Hello everyone,
I'm thinking of the right way of adding some loop related pragmas to GCC.
An example:
#pragma loop unroll = 2
for (i = 0; i < n; i ++)
{
Whatever...
}
Here I want the unroll factor of the loop to be 2 when doing RTL loop
unrolling.
B
Sorry for the slow response.
Thanks for getting back to me. I was pretty sure I didn't have this all
quite right yet.
asm ("" : "=m" (*x), "=r" (y));
you have to assume that the address in %0 might use the same register as %1
Ok, now I'm getting there. It helps that I've compiled s
13 matches
Mail list logo
