> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf
> Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> Sent: 21 January 2025 17:05
> To: Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Biener ;
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling S
VE with offloading to nvptx
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gcc On Behalf
> > Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > Sent: 27 December 2024 18:00
> > To: Jakub Jelinek
> > Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> > ; Richard Biener ;
> > g
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf
> Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> Sent: 27 December 2024 18:00
> To: Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Biener ;
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling S
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Stubbs
> Sent: 02 January 2025 17:21
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni ; Jakub Jelinek
>
> Cc: Richard Biener ; Richard Biener
> ; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
>
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: 17 December 2024 19:09
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Biener ;
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution o
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf
> Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> Sent: 02 December 2024 16:47
> To: Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Biener ;
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling S
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: 28 November 2024 17:39
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: Andrew Stubbs ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Biener ;
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution o
VE with offloading to nvptx
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gcc On Behalf
> > Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > Sent: 14 November 2024 13:59
> > To: Andrew Stubbs ; Jakub Jelinek
>
> > Cc: Richard Biener ; Richard Biener
> > ; gcc@gcc.
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf
> Of Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> Sent: 14 November 2024 13:59
> To: Andrew Stubbs ; Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: Richard Biener ; Richard Biener
> ; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
>
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling S
tx
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On 12/11/2024 06:01, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Jakub Jelinek
> >> Sent: 04 November 2024 21:44
> >> To: Pr
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: 04 November 2024 21:44
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: Richard Biener ; Richard Biener
> ; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
>
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or
se caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 1:52 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Richard Biener
> > > Sent: 21 October 2024 12:45
> > > To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: 21 October 2024 12:45
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge ; Jakub
> Jelinek
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: 17 October 2024 19:18
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: RE: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 202
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: 16 October 2024 13:05
> To: Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thomas Schwinge
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling SVE with offloading to nvptx
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024,
Hi,
Testing libgomp with SVE enabled (-mcpu=generic+sve2), results in ~60
UNRESOLVED errors with following error message:
lto1: fatal error: degree of 'poly_int' exceeds 'NUM_POLY_INT_COEFFS'
compilation terminated.
nvptx mkoffload: fatal error:
../../install/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-accel-
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Schwinge
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 7:37 PM
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Cc: Tom de Vries ; Roger Sayle
>
> Subject: GCC nvptx-none Target Testing (was: New page "nvptx" in the GCC
> wiki to document --target=nvptx-none config
ch64
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 11:36 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Richard Biener
> > > Sent:
Kulkarni
> > > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> > > Subject: Re: [RFC] Summary of libgomp failures for offloading to
> > > nvptx from AArch64
> > >
> > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul
pening links or attachments
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 3:36 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I am working on enabling offloading to nvptx from AAarch64 host. As
> > mentioned on wiki
> > (https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Offloading#Running_.2
Hi,
I am working on enabling offloading to nvptx from AAarch64 host. As mentioned
on wiki (https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Offloading#Running_.27make_check.27),
I ran make check-target-libgomp on AAarch64 host (and no GPU) with following
results:
=== libgomp Summary ===
# of expected p
On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 at 21:25, Tim Lange wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
Hi Tim,
Thanks for posting the POC patch!
Just a couple of comments (inline)
>
> tracked in PR105900 [0], I'd like to add support for a new warning on
> dubious allocation sizes. The new checker emits a warning when the
> allocation s
On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 at 01:39, Miika via Gcc wrote:
>
> Based on Jakub's and Yair's comments I created a new attribute "inrange".
> Inrage takes three arguments, pos min and max.
> Pos being the argument position in the function, and min and max defines the
> range of valid integer. Both min and max
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 at 20:09, Marek Polacek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 04:29:32PM +0200, Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been adding tests to the gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa folder
> > successfully for a while now. I am starting to add some tests into
> > gcc/testsui
in Sebor wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Ear
6/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> >>>> On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkar
gt; On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>>> On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 a
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 18:30, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
>
> On 04/08/2021 13:46, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 05:20:58PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
> >> wrote:
> >>> Both __builtin_constant_p and __is_constexpr will
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:20:45PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
> > wrote:
> > > The Linux kernel has a macro __is_constexpr to test if something is an
> > > integer constant expres
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> > The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the
> > second arg (__b),
> > should be an immediate val
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 15:41, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni v
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > Continuing from this thread,
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html
> > The propo
Hi,
Continuing from this thread,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html
The proposal is to provide a mechanism to mark a parameter in a
function as a literal constant.
Motivation:
Consider the following intrinsic vshl_n_s32 from arrm/arm_neon.h:
__extension__ extern __inl
On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 18:51, Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Well, I was thinking of this test-case:
> >
> > int f(int cond1, int cond2, int cond3, int x, int y)
> > {
> >
On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 17:01, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 15:43, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 6 May 2021, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Richard,
> > > > I was just wondering if second (and higher) o
On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 15:43, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > Hi Richard,
> > I was just wondering if second (and higher) order hoistings may defeat
> > the "AVAIL_OUT in at least one successor heuristic" ?
> >
> > For eg:
> > bb2:
> > if (cond1) goto
Hi Richard,
I was just wondering if second (and higher) order hoistings may defeat
the "AVAIL_OUT in at least one successor heuristic" ?
For eg:
bb2:
if (cond1) goto bb3 else goto bb4;
bb3:
if (cond2) goto bb5 else goto bb6;
bb5:
return x + y;
bb6:
return x + y;
bb4:
if (cond3) goto bb7 else g
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 22:54, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2021, pawel k. via Gcc wrote:
>
> > My best guess is if we could hookify all target code everything callable
> > either from frontends or midend, we could try to severly cut this estimate.
>
> That's a 700-patch series (there are
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 at 10:31, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that tree_node is implemented as a union (
> https://code.woboq.org/gcc/gcc/tree-core.h.html#tree_node). However, I
> cannot find a way of checking whether the current tree_node is really a
> base or type.
>
> For ins
On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 at 08:39, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am doing interprocedural dataflow analysis and countered the following
> issue. Suppose I have an GIMPLE IR code as follows, which is after the
> "simdclone" pass while before my own SIMPLE IPA pass:
>
>
> foo (int a, int b)
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 20:49, divyanshu jamloki via Gcc wrote:
>
> Ma'am
>
> I am a 1st year computer science engineering undergraduate student at
> krishna engineering college (affiliated to Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical
> University (AKTU)) . I am actively looking for some GSoC organisation t
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 17:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 14:36, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 17:37, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 7:11 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 14:36, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 17:37, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 7:11 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 16:15, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 5:47 PM Richard Bi
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 17:37, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 7:11 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 16:15, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 5:47 PM Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 16:15, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 5:47 PM Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 13:01, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > > >
> >
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 13:01, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 17:18, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > >
> >
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 17:18, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > >
> >
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > For the test mentioned in PR, I was trying to see if
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > For the test mentioned in PR, I was trying to see if we could do
> > specialized expansion for vcond in target when operands are -1 and 0.
> > arm_expand_vcond gets the following ope
Hi,
For the test mentioned in PR, I was trying to see if we could do
specialized expansion for vcond in target when operands are -1 and 0.
arm_expand_vcond gets the following operands:
(reg:V8QI 113 [ _2 ])
(reg:V8QI 117)
(reg:V8QI 118)
(lt (reg/v:V8QI 115 [ a ])
(reg/v:V8QI 116 [ b ]))
(reg/v:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 16:10, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 12:04 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 16:44, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:36 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 23 Sep 202
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 16:44, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:36 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 16:40, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:11 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 23 Sep 202
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 16:40, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:11 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 13:22, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:25 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 13:22, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:25 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 16:36, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:37 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 16:36, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:37 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 12:56, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:08 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 12:56, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:08 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 18:14, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 15:19, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 18:14, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 15:19, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:08, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > >
> > > > I obtained perf stat results for following benchmark runs:
> > > >
> > > > -O2:
> > > >
> > > >
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 15:19, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:08, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> >
> > > I obtained perf stat results for following benchmark runs:
> > >
> > > -O2:
> > >
> > > 7856832.692380 task-clock (msec) #1.000 CPUs utilized
> > >
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:08, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> > I obtained perf stat results for following benchmark runs:
> >
> > -O2:
> >
> > 7856832.692380 task-clock (msec) #1.000 CPUs utilized
> > 3758 context-switches #0.000 K/sec
> >
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 16:53, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 17:33, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 28 Aug 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > I wonder if that's (one of) the main factor(s) behind s
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 17:33, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
>
> > I wonder if that's (one of) the main factor(s) behind slowdown or it's
> > not too relevant ?
>
> Probably not. Some advice to make your s
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 17:27, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 1:17 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:50, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:34 PM Prathamesh Kulk
On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:34 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > We're seeing a consistent regression >10% on calculix with -O2 -flto vs -O2
> > on aarch64 in our validatio
Hi,
We're seeing a consistent regression >10% on calculix with -O2 -flto vs -O2
on aarch64 in our validation CI. I tried to investigate this issue a
bit, and it seems the regression comes from inlining of orthonl into
e_c3d. Disabling that brings back the performance. However, inlining
orthonl into
65 matches
Mail list logo
