20 15:21
To: Robin Dapp
CC: juzhe.zhong; gcc-patches; richard.sandiford
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VECT: Support floating-point in-order reduction for length
loop control
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Juzhe,
>
> I just noticed that we recently started calling things MASK_LEN
&g
-20 15:21
To: Robin Dapp
CC: juzhe.zhong; gcc-patches; richard.sandiford
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VECT: Support floating-point in-order reduction for length
loop control
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Juzhe,
>
> I just noticed that we recently started calling things MASK_LEN
&
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Juzhe,
>
> I just noticed that we recently started calling things MASK_LEN
> (instead of LEN_MASK before) with the reductions. Wouldn't we want
> to be consistent here? Especially as the length takes precedence.
> I realize the preparational work
Yes. We want to be consistent. I am planning to change all previous
"LEN_MASK_*" into "MASK_LEN_*"
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-07-20 14:22
To: juzhe.zhong; gcc-patches
CC: rdapp.gcc; richard.sandiford; rguenther
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VECT: Support flo
Hi Juzhe,
I just noticed that we recently started calling things MASK_LEN
(instead of LEN_MASK before) with the reductions. Wouldn't we want
to be consistent here? Especially as the length takes precedence.
I realize the preparational work like optabs is already upstream
but still wanted to
From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
Hi, Richard and Richi.
This patch support floating-point in-order reduction for loop length control.
Consider this following case:
float foo (float *__restrict a, int n)
{
float result = 1.0;
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
result += a[i];
return result;
}
When
