Hi,
some short note on coupling loop tiling and gloog code generator.
I will need to extend mapping of old induction variables <-> new
induction variables. Until now I assume preserved one-to-one
relationship. But, this does not allow many of the loop
transformations (like loop inversion). I will
I started to write the following message two days ago but I wished to
send a .cloog which is not easy since I changed my laptop just before
the trip I'm still on ! I need to finish installing all the tools...
Here is the message, just a follow-up of Albert's one.
Ced.
---
Hi Tobi,
Sebastian gave
Hi all,
Yes, Sebastian is Right for now, and thanks for pointing out the references.
Yet in the longer term, we are working on CLooG extensions to facilitate
tiling with parametric sizes, multidomensional tiling, increased
scalability, no risks of integer overflows, and better quality of
generate
Hi Tobi,
Thanks for working on this.
Solution 2 is the right one.
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Tobias Grosser
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. It is not very efficient. As we have many multiplications in the
> code.
> Will later gcc optimization passes convert these multiplications to
> addit
Hi Sebastian, Hi Cedric,
since Thursday I think about how to implement loop tiling in graphite.
Lets start with a simple example:
for (i=0;i<=10;i++) {
for (j=0;j<=20;j++) {
S1 ;
}
}
# eq/in i j n 1
1 1 0 0 0 # i >= 0
1 -1 0 0 10 # i <= 10
1 0 1 0 0 # j
