Re: isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 11:58:30AM +0200, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > For the approach pluto is taking, you'll have to look at the source > code, see pluto_intra_tile_optimize_band. > For the other two approaches I mentioned above, reports will > be made available within the next couple of weeks.

[PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

And using range-info to constain parameters. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2017-10-18 Richard Biener * graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c (translate_isl_ast_to_gimple::set_rename): Simplify.

Re: isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 07:47:43PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On September 29, 2017 9:58:41 PM GMT+02:00, Sebastian Pop > wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Sven Verdoolaege > > wrote: > >> [Sorry for the resend; I used the wrong email

Re: isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On September 29, 2017 9:58:41 PM GMT+02:00, Sebastian Pop wrote: >On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Sven Verdoolaege > wrote: >> [Sorry for the resend; I used the wrong email address to CC Alex] >> >> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Richard

Re: isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On 29/09/17 21:58, Sebastian Pop wrote: On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: [Sorry for the resend; I used the wrong email address to CC Alex] On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: Ah, so I now see why we do not

Re: isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > [Sorry for the resend; I used the wrong email address to CC Alex] > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> Ah, so I now see why we do not perform interchange on trivial cases like

isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

[Sorry for the resend; I used the wrong email address to CC Alex] On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > Ah, so I now see why we do not perform interchange on trivial cases like > > double A[1024][1024], B[1024][1024]; > > void foo(void) > { > for (int i = 0; i <

isl scheduler and spatial locality (Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC)

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > Ah, so I now see why we do not perform interchange on trivial cases like > > double A[1024][1024], B[1024][1024]; > > void foo(void) > { > for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i) > for (int j = 0; j < 1024; ++j) > A[j][i] =

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > I fixed the "hack patch" somewhat but realized it's not really possible > ATM to get back at this form because the array descriptor contains only > information to generate the linearized form. So while I get now correct

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > Looks like even when hacking the Fortran FE to produce nested > > ARRAY_REFs we run into the same issue for > > > > (gdb) p debug_data_reference (dr) > > #(Data Ref: > > #

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > Looks like even when hacking the Fortran FE to produce nested > ARRAY_REFs we run into the same issue for > > (gdb) p debug_data_reference (dr) > #(Data Ref: > # bb: 17 > # stmt: >

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > Another thing I notice is that we don't handle the multi-dimensional > accesses the fortran frontend produces: > > (gdb) p debug_data_reference (dr) > #(Data Ref: > # bb: 18 > # stmt: _43 = *a_141(D)[_42]; > # ref:

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

Hi skimo, On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Sven Verdoolaege < sven.verdoola...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 09:19:50AM -0500, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > Sven, is there already a function that computes the sum of all > > strides in a proximity map? Maybe you have code that does > >

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Richard Biener

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Richard Biener > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > This simplifies

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 09:19:50AM -0500, Sebastian Pop wrote: > Sven, is there already a function that computes the sum of all > strides in a proximity map? Maybe you have code that does > something similar in pet or ppcg? What exactly do you want to sum? If this involves any counting, then it

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > > > > > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal > > > TLC.

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal > > TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from a stupid mistake I made > > when reworking

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> > >> > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal >> > TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal > > TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from a stupid mistake I made > > when reworking canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa. > > >

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Richard Biener wrote: > > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal > TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from a stupid mistake I made > when reworking canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,

Re: [PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal > TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from a stupid mistake I made > when reworking canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa. > > Bootstrapped and tested on

[PATCH][GRAPHITE] More TLC

This simplifies canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa and does other minimal TLC. It also adds a testcase I reduced from a stupid mistake I made when reworking canonicalize_loop_closed_ssa. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk. SPEC CPU 2006 is happy with it, current