Hello,
>>> CUDA? In any case, I don't see how the restriction helps users, and the
>>> attribute at the IR level has a well-defined meaning regardless. If a user
>>> were to have a use case, they'd simply find the restriction arbitrary and
>>> frustrating.
>>
>> Yes, CUDA was already considere
Hello,
>> CUDA? In any case, I don't see how the restriction helps users, and the
>> attribute at the IR level has a well-defined meaning regardless. If a user
>> were to have a use case, they'd simply find the restriction arbitrary and
>> frustrating.
>
> Yes, CUDA was already considered as w
then.
;)
Anastasia
-Original Message-
From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfin...@anl.gov]
Sent: 10 May 2016 00:33
To: Anastasia Stulova
Cc: nd; Clang Commits; Matt Arsenault; Ettore Speziale; Aaron Ballman
Subject: Re: [Clang] Convergent Attribute
- Original Message -
> From: "An
- Original Message -
> From: "Richard Smith via cfe-commits"
> To: "Matt Arsenault"
> Cc: "Clang Commits"
> Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 4:45:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [Clang] Convergent Attribute
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Richard Smit
- Original Message -
> From: "Anastasia Stulova via cfe-commits"
> To: "Matt Arsenault" , "Ettore Speziale"
> , "Aaron Ballman"
>
> Cc: "nd" , "Clang Commits"
> Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 12:39:19 PM
> Sub
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Matt Arsenault via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> On May 6, 2016, at 18:12, Richard Smith via cfe-commits <
>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:20 PM,
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Matt Arsenault via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On May 6, 2016, at 18:12, Richard Smith via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Matt Arsenault via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> w
> On May 9, 2016, at 10:39, Anastasia Stulova via cfe-commits
> wrote:
>
> Since it's not a part of any official spec we could of course make it
> accepted with anything.
>
> Just out of curiosity what other programming models supported by Clang do you
> think this attribute would be useful
Hello,
> On 05/06/2016 12:11 PM, Anastasia Stulova via cfe-commits wrote:
>> I was just wondering whether it would make sense to restrict the usage of
>> the attribute to OpenCL language i.e. to add "let LangOpts = [OpenCL];" in
>> the attribute definition.
> This seems to be a pointless arbitr
nault [mailto:matthew.arsena...@amd.com]
Sent: 07 May 2016 00:37
To: Anastasia Stulova; Ettore Speziale; Aaron Ballman
Cc: nd; Clang Commits
Subject: Re: [Clang] Convergent Attribute
On 05/06/2016 12:11 PM, Anastasia Stulova via cfe-commits wrote:
> I was just wondering whether it would make sense to restrict the
> On May 6, 2016, at 18:12, Richard Smith via cfe-commits
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Matt Arsenault via cfe-commits
> mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> On 05/06/2016 02:42 PM, David Majnemer via cfe-commits wrote:
> This example looks wrong to me. It doesn't seem m
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Matt Arsenault via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 05/06/2016 02:42 PM, David Majnemer via cfe-commits wrote:
>
>> This example looks wrong to me. It doesn't seem meaningful for a function
>> to be both readonly and convergent, because converge
On 05/06/2016 12:11 PM, Anastasia Stulova via cfe-commits wrote:
I was just wondering whether it would make sense to restrict the usage of the attribute
to OpenCL language i.e. to add "let LangOpts = [OpenCL];" in the attribute
definition.
This seems to be a pointless arbitrary restriction to
On 05/06/2016 02:42 PM, David Majnemer via cfe-commits wrote:
This example looks wrong to me. It doesn't seem meaningful for a
function to be both readonly and convergent, because convergent means
the call has some side-effect visible to other threads and readonly
means the call has no side-eff
On 05/06/2016 02:53 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits wrote:
It looks like we added the noduplicate attribute to clang to support
OpenCL's barrier function. Did we get the semantics for it wrong for
its intended use case?
Yes. Noduplicate is essentially deprecated in favor of convergent.
nodupl
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:42 PM, David Majnemer
wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Ettore Speziale via cfe-commits <
>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> > In the
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Ettore Speziale via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> > In the case of foo, there could be a problem.
>> > If you do not mark it c
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Ettore Speziale via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > In the case of foo, there could be a problem.
> > If you do not mark it convergent, the LLVM sink pass push the call to
> foo to the then branch of the ternary operator, hence the pr
Hello,
> In the case of foo, there could be a problem.
> If you do not mark it convergent, the LLVM sink pass push the call to foo to
> the then branch of the ternary operator, hence the program has been
> incorrectly optimized.
>
> Really? It looks like the problem is that you lied to the comp
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Ettore Speziale via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > I would appreciate a bit more background on this attribute's
> > semantics. How would a user know when to add this attribute to their
> > function definition? Are there other attribu
nCL language i.e. to add "let LangOpts = [OpenCL];" in
> the attribute definition.
>
> Thanks!
> Anastasia
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ettore Speziale [mailto:speziale.ett...@gmail.com ]
> Sent: 05 May 2016 01:48
> To: Aaron Ballman
> Cc: Ettore
eziale.ett...@gmail.com]
Sent: 05 May 2016 01:48
To: Aaron Ballman
Cc: Ettore Speziale; Anastasia Stulova; Clang Commits
Subject: Re: [Clang] Convergent Attribute
Hello,
> I would appreciate a bit more background on this attribute's
> semantics. How would a user know when to add th
Hello,
> I would appreciate a bit more background on this attribute's
> semantics. How would a user know when to add this attribute to their
> function definition? Are there other attributes that cannot be used in
> conjunction with this one? Should this apply to member functions? What
> about Obj
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Ettore Speziale
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> the attached patch introduces the `convergent` attribute.
>
> It is meant to be lowered into the LLVM `convergent` attribute, to restrict
> optimizations of attributed functions — e.g. you can attach convergent to
> OpenCL’s ba
24 matches
Mail list logo
