[PATCH] #pragma vectorize

[Hal Finkel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com>
> To: "Raul Silvera" <rsilvera at google.com>
> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Alexey Bataev" <alexey.bataev at intel.com>, "llvm cfe" <cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 1:30:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] #pragma vectorize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 22, 2014, at 11:24 AM, Raul Silvera < rsilvera at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does this pragma widen also asserts safety, or does it depend on the
> compiler proving independence?
> 
> 
> This specific pragma only affects the decision of the vectorizer
> 'cost model'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> widen does seem to imply the data types are being widened -- also a
> form of vectorization. Perhaps interleave is another word to
> consider?
> 
> 
> I also like ‘interleave’.
> 

I like this as well.

 -Hal

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raúl E Silvera | SWE | rsilvera at google.com | 408-789-2846
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Nadav Rotem" < nrotem at apple.com >
> > To: "Hal Finkel" < hfinkel at anl.gov >
> 
> > Cc: "Tyler Nowicki" < tnowicki at apple.com >, cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> > , "Alexey Bataev" < alexey.bataev at intel.com >,
> > "Alexander Musman" < alexander.musman at gmail.com >, "Chandler
> > Carruth" < chandlerc at google.com >
> 
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:44:21 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] #pragma vectorize
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> > On Apr 22, 2014, at 10:38 AM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Okay, this is reasonable, but I'm still not sure it should be in a
> > pragma called 'vectorize'. This particular transformation can be
> > applied (and more often than not is applied) to scalar code.
> > Strictly speaking it is an optimization that exposes ILP, and has
> > little to do with vectorization.
> > 
> > 
> > This is a good point. Maybe ILP would be a better name?
> 
> No, actually I like widen better because it is an action word. I
> don't think that ILP gives any idea of what the compiler is being
> asked to do. Not that I'm in love with widen, but I don't have a
> better suggestion -- unsequenced_unrolling or
> unsequenced_iterations, etc. all seem a bit bulky ;)
> 
> -Hal
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > That having been said, the fact that the correctness model for this
> > 'widening' operation is similar (although not identical) to that
> > for
> > vectorization, and thus implemented by the vectorizer, is not facet
> > of the implementation we should expose to the user. However, pragma
> > widen is fine with me too.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Hal Finkel
> Assistant Computational Scientist
> Leadership Computing Facility
> Argonne National Laboratory
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory