[cfe-dev] Adding "simd" pragma to Clang

[Andrey Bokhanko]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Pekka Jääskeläinen <
pekka.jaaskelainen at tut.fi> wrote:

> On 02/14/2014 05:42 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
>
>> 1. Does our "llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access" metadata represent the
>> implied
>> semantics, which seem to cover "vector dependencies" but not loop-carried
>> dependencies
>>
>
> IIRC the end result from the previous discussion was that
> as it's not in general possible to know which are "compiler proven
> dependencies"
> (and which only "assumed" due to, e.g., not having a smart enough AA),
> we can might as well assume ivdep to have the "embarrassingly parallel
> loop" semantics the llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access was intended originally
> to denote. Seems Intel came to the same conclusion?
>

The implementation we have is experimental, so we just used
"llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access" as it looked as the best thing available.
Frankly, not much thought went into this.

Andrey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140217/0c2fb92e/attachment.html>