as obvious,
2012-05-20 Razya Ladelsky ra...@il.ibm.com
* tree-parloops.c : Add myself to contributors, update
TODO list, add link to wiki.
Thanks,
Razya
Index: tree-parloops.c
===
--- tree-parloops.c (revision
3.3 X
436.cactusADM 4.5 X
459.GemsFDTD1.27 X
481.wrf 1.25 X
Bootstrap and testsuite (with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4) pass
successfully.
spec-2006 showed no regressions.
OK for trunk?
Thanks,
razya
2012-05-08 Razya Ladelsky ra...@il.ibm.com
* tree
ran spec-2006, and it showed no regressions.
2012-04-20 Razya Ladelsky ra...@il.ibm.com
PR tree-optimization/46886
* tree-parloops.c (transform_to_exit_first_loop): Remove
setting of number of iterations according to the loop pattern.
Duplicate
.c.
2012-03-26 Razya Ladelsky ra...@il.ibm.com
PR tree-optimization/46886
* tree-parloops.c (transform_to_exit_first_loop):Set
number of iterations correctly when the body may appear at the latch.
(pallelize_loops): Remove the condition
Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de wrote on 26/03/2012 01:23:15 PM:
From: Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Date: 26/03/2012 01:23 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Permanent Fix for PR46886
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Razya Ladelsky wrote
+
+ /* if the latch contains more than the one statemnt of control
variable
+ increment then it contains the body. */
+ if (exit_1-dest == loop-latch last_and_only_stmt (loop-latch))
new_rhs = gimple_cond_rhs (cond_stmt);
please check what the comment suggests, thus,
Hi,
I need to use do_while_loop_p, but I'm not sure its functionality is what
I expected it to be.
This is the part that I do not understand:
/* If the header contains just a condition, it is not a do-while loop. */
stmt = last_and_only_stmt (loop-header);
if (stmt
gimple_code
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote on 21/11/2011 07:25:10 PM:
From: Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: GCC Patches gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 21/11/2011 07:25 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 21/11/2011 02:57:07 PM:
From: Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com, GCC Patches gcc-
patc...@gcc.gnu.org
Date: 21/11/2011 02:57 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote on 21/11/2011 03:59:15 PM:
From: Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: GCC Patches gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 21/11/2011 03:59 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote on 21/11/2011 05:07:54 PM:
From: Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: GCC Patches gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 21/11/2011 05:08 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree
I hope it's clearer now, I will add a comment to the code, and submit
it
before committing it.
No, it's not clearer, because it is not clear why you need to add the
hack
instead of avoiding the 2nd access function. And iff you add the hack it
needs a comment why zero should be special
Hi,
I have been exploring non-deterministic failures in cactusADM (when
autopar is enabled with a low threshold)' on a Power7 multi core machine.
The failure actually reoccurs in several other spec2006 benchmarks
when the threshold is lowered to allow for more loops to get parallelized.
The
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 17/10/2011 09:03:59 AM:
From: Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Sebastian Pop s...@gcc.gnu.org
Date: 17/10/2011 09:04 AM
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960 ,Fix
This patch fixes the failures described in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49960
It also fixes bzips when run with autopar enabled.
In both cases the self dependences are not handled correctly.
In the first case, a non affine access is analyzed:
in the second, the distance vector is
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote on 25/07/2011 05:54:28
PM:
From: Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Zdenek Dvorak
rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz, Sebastian Pop s...@gcc.gnu.org
Date: 25/07/2011 05:54 PM
Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM wrote on 25/07/2011 05:44:02 PM:
From: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Zdenek Dvorak rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 25/07/2011 05:44 PM
Subject: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49471
Hi
Zdenek Dvorak rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz wrote on 30/06/2011 15:21:43:
From: Zdenek Dvorak rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 30/06/2011 15:21
Subject: Re: PATCH] PR 49580
Hi
Zdenek Dvorak rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz wrote on 05/07/2011 13:37:41:
From: Zdenek Dvorak rakd...@kam.mff.cuni.cz
To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: 05/07/2011 13:37
Subject: Re: PATCH] PR 49580
Hi,
I moved
= gsi_after_labels (preheader);
new_rhs = force_gimple_operand_gsi (gsi1, new_rhs, true,
NULL_TREE,false,GSI_CONTINUE_LINKING);
}
=
22-12-2009 Razya Ladelsky ra...@il.ibm.com
* tree-cfg.c (gimple_duplicate_sese_tail): Insert the stmt
Tobias Grosser gros...@fim.uni-passau.de wrote on 26/03/2009 09:17:26:
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 10:36 +0800, Li Feng wrote:
Hi all,
Below is the proposal of this gSoc project. I'd really like you
review and
comment on this and then I can plan this project better.
Hi Li,
this looks
Antoniu Pop antoniu@gmail.com wrote on 18/03/2009 18:55:52:
I'd like to explore distributing threads across a heterogenous NUMA
architecture. I.e. input/output data would have to be transferred
explicitly, and the compiler would have to have more than one backend.
I'm currently
Tobias Grosser gros...@fim.uni-passau.de wrote on 10/03/2009 16:54:41:
Hi Razya
great to hear these Graphite plans. Some short comments.
Thanks :)
On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 16:13 +0200, Razya Ladelsky wrote:
[...]
The first step, as we see it, will teach Graphite that parallel code
Hello,
Described here is the future plan for automatic parallelization in GCC.
The current autopar pass is based on GOMP infrastructure; it distributes
iterations of loops
to several threads (the number is instructed by the user) if it was
determined that
they are independent. The only
Hi,
When enabling -ftree-parallelize-loops=4 , bootstrap fails:
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
../../gcc/gcc/dwarf2out.c: In function âdwarf2out_frame_debugâ:
../../gcc/gcc/dwarf2out.c:2393: error: array subscript is above array
bounds
../../gcc/gcc/dwarf2out.c:2394: error: array
Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 19/11/2008 20:54:19:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM, David Edelsohn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM, David Edelsohn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You
David Edelsohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 17/11/2008 18:45:06:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Razya Ladelsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to bootstrap with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4 enabled
(passed as
BOOTCFLAGS).
I'm failing at the begining of stage2 because
Hi,
I'm trying to bootstrap with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4 enabled (passed as
BOOTCFLAGS).
I'm failing at the begining of stage2 because the compiler can't find
libgomp.spec
Can anyone help..?
Thanks,
Razya
Hi
I am working on expanding auto par for outer loops, and while doing so,
I need to duplicate the whole body of the outer loop. the current
function that is used for the inner loops
is gimple_duplicate_sese_tail, only it doesn't support subloops.
Any ideas on how I can alternatively get the
Hi
I am working on expanding auto par for outer loops, and while doing so,
I need to duplicate the whole body of the outer loop. the current
function that is used for the inner loops
is gimple_duplicate_sese_tail, only it doesn't support subloops.
Any ideas on how I can alternatively get the
Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 13/11/2007 20:11:35:
Razya Ladelsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This patch adds documentation for fipa-cp and -fipa-matrix-reorg.
2007-11-12 Razya Ladelsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* doc/invoke.texi (fipa-cp, fipa-matrix-reorg): Add
Kenneth Zadeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/11/2007 19:49:29:
Razya Ladelsky wrote:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/11/2007 01:51:33:
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Janis Johnson wrote:
-fipa-cp steven
-fipa-matrix-reorg razya
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/11/2007
12:28:05:
On Nov 12, 2007 10:06 AM, Razya Ladelsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kenneth Zadeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/11/2007
19:49:29:
Razya Ladelsky wrote:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/11/2007
01:51:33
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/11/2007 01:51:33:
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Janis Johnson wrote:
-fipa-cp steven
-fipa-matrix-reorg razya
-fipa-pure-const zadeck (enabled with -O)
-fipa-referencezadeck (enabled with
Bootstrap on i386-linux has been broken for a week now, from what I
can see. I have reported it as PR33679
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33679), but AFAIK noone
has reproduced it, as most people now build for i686-linux. Could
someone please spare a cycle to confirm this
Hi
I'm getting this failure on powerpc:
../../gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c: In function 'gfc_simplify_scale':
../../gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c: In function 'gfc_simplify_scale':
../../gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c:3345: error: type mismatch in binary
expression
long unsigned int
long unsigned int
This is the error message I get (during stage2):
/home/razya/mainline/build/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home/razya/mainline/build/./prev-gcc/
-B/home/razya//powerpc64-suse-linux/bin/ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wold-style-definition
Hi,
When passing an address of a local variable as the first argument of
'sync_fetch_and_add'
I get an error of unrecognizable insn.
For example, the test below (extracted from
gcc.c-torture/compile/sync-1.c) fails on powerpc.
If however, 'uc' was a global variable, the compilation passed
Hi,
I'm trying to bootstrap (parloop branch) with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4,
which requires also -fopenmp.
I'm using: make BOOTCFLAGS=-O2 -ftree-parallelize-loops=4 -fopenmp
bootstrap -j 16
I'm failing at the begining of stage2 because the compiler can't find
libgomp.spec
How do I bootstrap
Hi,
In order to generate code for omp_atomic, I use force_gimple_operand which
calls gimplify_omp_atomic;
in some cases it calls gimplify_omp_atomic_pipeline, which expands the
atomic operation to a
cycle (implementing it using atomic compare-and-swap primitive).
However, the cond_expr that is
David Edelsohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 19/07/2007 16:39:40:
Razya,
Many of the tests fail on AIX as well.
David
Ok,
Looking into it.
Thanks
FAIL: gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-1.c scan-ipa-dump-times Flattened 3
dimensions
1
FAIL: gcc.dg/matrix/matrix-2.c scan-ipa-dump-times
Ayal Zaks/Haifa/IBM wrote on 15/07/2007 09:32:10:
Is anyone else seeing failures on the gcc.dg/matrix tests? I am
getting
the following failures on IA64 HP-UX:
Hope Razya can help spot the cause, after she returns from vacation
later this week.
Ayal.
FAIL:
H. J. Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 27/05/2007 21:00:38:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 06:52:30PM +0100, Rafael Espindola wrote:
On 5/27/07, Razya Ladelsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Getting failure during bootstrap for libjava on powerpc linux:
configure: error: `CXX' has changed
Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM wrote on 29/01/2007 13:46:33:
Hi,
Does gcc apply inter-procedural optimizations across functions called
using
a function pointer? I guess that gcc performs conservatively assuming
that
the pointer could point everywhere because the pointer is a declared
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 29/09/2006 01:55:24:
Razya Ladelsky wrote:
Except for new optimizations, IPCP (currently on mainline) should also
be
transformed to SSA.
IPCP in SSA code exists on IPA branch, and will be submitted to GCC4.3
after IPA branch
is committed
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 29/09/2006 01:55:24:
Razya Ladelsky wrote:
Except for new optimizations, IPCP (currently on mainline) should also
be
transformed to SSA.
IPCP in SSA code exists on IPA branch, and will be submitted to GCC4.3
after IPA branch
is committed
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 08:34 +0200, mathieu lacage wrote:
hi,
Maybe it is the idea of writing an IPA pass operating on SSA which is
just plain braindead in which case it would be nice for someone to tell
me so :)
It is not braindead except GCC currently does not support that on the
mainline.
Hi Eric,
A patch to fix this regression was committed earlier today to GCC4.1.
Razya
Hi Razya,
Yes, I am aware of this problem.
It does not fail for power and I'm trying to figure out why it fails
for
x86 architecture.
It appears that the type of the constant being passed to a
Hi,
My case is this:
I version the operator function and name it operator.number (creating
an identifier which is not valid in the source code).
The assembly name created for the versioned function is the same as the
tree identifier, which is not valid for the assembler.
I tried creating an
*** Jeff Knaggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 249,254
--- 249,255
Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matt Kraai[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott Robert Ladd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ Razya Ladelsky
50 matches
Mail list logo
