On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 10:18 -0400, Tim Prince wrote:
> Current Intel implementations of safelen will fail to vectorize and give
> notice if the value is set unnecessarily large. It's been agreed that
> increasing the safelen value beyond the optimum level should not turn
> off vectorization.
Y
On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 15:37 +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> sometimes it can be useful to annotate loops for better vectorization,
> which is rather independent from parallelization.
>
> For vectorization, GCC has [0]:
> a) Cilk Plus's #pragma simd [1]
> b) OpenMP 4.0's #pragma omp
Tobias Burnus writes:
>
> Those require -fcilkplus and -fopenmp, respectively, and activate much
> more. The question is whether it makes sense to provide a means to ask
> the compiler for SIMD vectorization without enabling all the other things
> of Cilk Plus/OpenMP. What's your opinion?
If you
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:18:20AM -0400, Tim Prince wrote:
> I pulled down an update of gcc gomp-4_0-branch yesterday and see in
> the not-yet-working additions to gcc testsuite there appears to be a
> move toward adding more cilkplus clauses to omp simd, such as
> firstprivate lastprivate (which
On 9/9/2013 9:37 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Dear all,
sometimes it can be useful to annotate loops for better vectorization,
which is rather independent from parallelization.
For vectorization, GCC has [0]:
a) Cilk Plus's #pragma simd [1]
b) OpenMP 4.0's #pragma omp simd [2]
Those require -fci
