SLP/Loop vectorizer pass ordering

[Hal Finkel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Molloy" <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk>
> To: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com>
> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Chad Rosier" <mcrosier at codeaurora.org>, "LLVM Commits"
> <llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es>
> Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 5:27:07 AM
> Subject: Re: SLP/Loop vectorizer pass ordering
> 
> 
> Great!
> 
> 
> Hal, I'm happy. Are you happy enough with the state of MDNoAlias that
> we can flip both switches?

Yes, I think we're good to go.

Thanks again,
Hal

> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> On 3 September 2014 18:46, Chandler Carruth < chandlerc at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I've run our benchmarks and a sizable test suite. I see no
> regressions and some small improvements. Please feel free to enable
> both features provided everyone else is happy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Chandler Carruth" < chandlerc at google.com >
> > To: "James Molloy" < james at jamesmolloy.co.uk >
> > Cc: "Chad Rosier" < mcrosier at codeaurora.org >, "Hal Finkel" <
> > hfinkel at anl.gov >, "LLVM Commits"
> > < llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu >, "Tobias Grosser" < tobias at grosser.es
> > >
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 4:38:06 AM
> > Subject: Re: SLP/Loop vectorizer pass ordering
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:29 AM, James Molloy <
> > james at jamesmolloy.co.uk > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Chandler,
> > 
> > 
> > This is waiting on you reporting numbers, I think. Did you get a
> > chance to run your benchmarks?
> > Sorry, I should have followed up here as well as on IRC with Hal.
> > 
> > 
> > I tried to get numbers. However, enabling Hal's feature caused a
> > large number of my benchmarks to fail... over 50% of them. So I
> > didn't get much useful data. What I got looked fine, but I'd really
> > rather some higher confidence in the scoped-aa stuff first.
> 
> Please try again after r216863 (which at least gives me a clean
> test-suite and self-host on Linux/x86_64). The noalias parameter
> attribute -> metadata conversion logic, as it turns out, was pretty
> broken -- it is certainly better now.
> 
> In case you're curious where all your noalias parameters are coming
> from, aside from the obvious places where you have __restrict__, it
> is also that Clang adds noalias to every sret parameter (for
> aggregate return values). As a result, we actually get reasonable
> testing coverage from self-hosting on the noalias -> metadata
> conversion (or so I currently believe).
> 
> > 
> > 
> > I'm not sure what to do next though. I mean, I can spend a bunch of
> > time trying to reduce a test case, but it will take me a huge
> > amount
> > of time.
> > 
> > 
> > Note that all the code failing is compiled with no TBAA and there
> > is
> > very little C code involved... so I feel lik ethere must be
> > something pretty basic that is going wrong with this new mode.
> 
> Yes, there certainly was.
> 
> Thanks again,
> Hal
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Hal Finkel
> Assistant Computational Scientist
> Leadership Computing Facility
> Argonne National Laboratory
> 
> 
> 

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