On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I checked that this move helps.
> Does it mean that I've got approval to integrate it to trunk?
Yes, if it survives bootstrap & regtest.
Richard.
> 2016-08-09 14:33 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:26 PM
Richard,
I checked that this move helps.
Does it mean that I've got approval to integrate it to trunk?
2016-08-09 14:33 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Richard,
>>
>> The patch proposed by you does not work properly for
>> g++.dg/vect/pr7072
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> The patch proposed by you does not work properly for
> g++.dg/vect/pr70729-nest.cc test since the reference for this->S_n has
> been cached as dependent for outer loop and loop is not vectorized:
>
> g++ -Ofast -fopenmp -mavx2
Richard,
The patch proposed by you does not work properly for
g++.dg/vect/pr70729-nest.cc test since the reference for this->S_n has
been cached as dependent for outer loop and loop is not vectorized:
g++ -Ofast -fopenmp -mavx2 pr70729-nest.cc -c
-fdump-tree-vect-details
grep 'LOOP VECTORIZED' p
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Yes it is impossible since all basic blocks are handled from outer
> loops to innermost so we can not have the sequence with wrong
> dependence, i.e. we cached that reference is independent (due to
> safelen) but the same reference in outer
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Here is updated patch which implements your proposal - I pass loop
> instead of stmt to determine either REF is defined inside LOOP nest or
> not. I checked that for pr70729-nest.cc the reference this->S_n for
> statements whic
Richard,
Here is updated patch which implements your proposal - I pass loop
instead of stmt to determine either REF is defined inside LOOP nest or
not. I checked that for pr70729-nest.cc the reference this->S_n for
statements which are out of innermost loop are not considered as
independent as y
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard.
>
> It turned out that the fix proposed by you does not work for liggomp
> tests simd3 and simd4.
> The reason is that we can't change safelen value for references not
> defined inside loop. So I add missed check on it to patch.
Hi Richard,
Did you have a chance to look at this patch?
Thanks.
2016-07-29 17:00 GMT+03:00 Yuri Rumyantsev :
> Hi Richard.
>
> It turned out that the fix proposed by you does not work for liggomp
> tests simd3 and simd4.
> The reason is that we can't change safelen value for references not
> de
Hi Richard.
It turned out that the fix proposed by you does not work for liggomp
tests simd3 and simd4.
The reason is that we can't change safelen value for references not
defined inside loop. So I add missed check on it to patch.
Is it OK for trunk?
ChangeLog:
2016-07-29 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tr
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included.
> Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
> Is it OK for trunk?
>
> Thanks.
> ChangeLog:
> 2016-07-28 Yuri Rumyantsev
>
> PR t
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included.
> Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
> Is it OK for trunk?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks.
> ChangeLog:
> 2016-07-28 Yuri
Richard,
I prepare a patch which is based on yours. New test is also included.
Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks.
ChangeLog:
2016-07-28 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tree-optimization/71734
* tree-ssa-loop-im.c (ref_indep_loop_p_1): Pass value
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> It turned out that the patch proposed by you does not work properly
> for nested loop. If we slightly change pr70729.cc to
> (non-essential part is omitted
> void inline Ss::foo (float w)
> {
> #pragma omp simd
> for (int
Hi Richard,
It turned out that the patch proposed by you does not work properly
for nested loop. If we slightly change pr70729.cc to
(non-essential part is omitted
void inline Ss::foo (float w)
{
#pragma omp simd
for (int i=0; i:
> Richard,
>
> Jakub has already fixed it.
> Sorry for troubles.
>
Richard,
Jakub has already fixed it.
Sorry for troubles.
Yuri.
2016-07-19 18:29 GMT+03:00 Renlin Li :
> Hi Yuri,
>
> I saw this test case runs on arm platforms, and maybe other platforms as
> well.
>
> testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr70729.cc:7:10: fatal error: xmmintrin.h: No such
> file or directory
>
Hi Yuri,
I saw this test case runs on arm platforms, and maybe other platforms as
well.
testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr70729.cc:7:10: fatal error: xmmintrin.h: No such
file or directory
Before the change here, it's gated by vect_simd_clones target selector,
which limit it to i?86/x86_64 platform
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Thanks for your help - your patch looks much better.
> Here is new patch in which additional argument was added to determine
> source loop of reference.
>
> Bootstrap and regression testing did not show any new failures.
>
>
Richard!
Did you have a chance to look at this patch?
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-07-08 17:07 GMT+03:00 Yuri Rumyantsev :
> Hi Richard,
>
> Thanks for your help - your patch looks much better.
> Here is new patch in which additional argument was added to determine
> source loop of reference.
>
> Bootstra
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your help - your patch looks much better.
Here is new patch in which additional argument was added to determine
source loop of reference.
Bootstrap and regression testing did not show any new failures.
Is it OK for trunk?
ChangeLog:
2016-07-08 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tree-o
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I pointed out in the commentary that REF is defined inside loop and
> this check is related to this statement. Should I clarify it?
>
> + /* We consider REF defined in LOOP as independent if at least 2 loop
> + iterations
Richard,
I pointed out in the commentary that REF is defined inside loop and
this check is related to this statement. Should I clarify it?
+ /* We consider REF defined in LOOP as independent if at least 2 loop
+ iterations are not dependent. */
2016-07-06 12:38 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a simple fix to cure regressions introduced by my fix for
> 70729. Patch also contains minor changes in test found by Jakub.
>
> Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
Hi All,
Here is a simple fix to cure regressions introduced by my fix for
70729. Patch also contains minor changes in test found by Jakub.
Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
Is it OK for trunk?
ChangeLog:
2016-07-05 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tree-optimization/71734
24 matches
Mail list logo
