- User Since
- Oct 9 2015, 4:06 AM (80 w, 4 d)
Address review comments and apply some more formatting fixes.
Address review comments.
I don't see anything wrong with the code.
Fri, Apr 21
Wed, Apr 19
There might be a benefit to choosing a larger alignment, like 64 bytes, due to cache line alignment.
Sat, Apr 8
When applied to current trunk, this code can get into an infinite loop. Please see the sample LLVM IR at https://paste.debian.net/926533/
Feb 15 2017
Feb 10 2017
Feb 1 2017
I haven't looked in too much detail yet. I assume getelementptr doesn't work with these pointers, so it would be good to have a negative test which ensures that GEP use fails.
I see the same problem as Tom here. Do those shaders use read-only SSBOs? If so, this could perhaps be done at the Mesa level. But even then, there'd be a problem if the same memory is bound to two different SSBOs, and one of them is written to, unless the SSBO is marked 'restrict'.
Jan 30 2017
Backing out the effectively dead FMF code, but leave the corresponding
FIXMEs in place.
Jan 27 2017
Yeah, I personally feel more comfortable having the exact same change on the branch.
Drop unnecessary getNode()s.
But you can't because they'll crash [...]
@arsenm, unfortunately I can't add flag-based tests, since as @hfinkel points out, you can't actually get the flag on an FMA or FMAD in the DAG. @hfinkel, the idea was to put the check in already anyway, since by the discussion with @spatel, the plan is to add FMF for all nodes eventually. That seems reasonable to me.
Formatting of FIXMEs
Jan 23 2017
Jan 20 2017
Added the DefaultFlags. It does fix @spatel's example for me. Anything else?
Jan 19 2017
Obviously it'd be even easier to skip the getFlags() thing entirely now, since it can never evaluate to true. But the right way forward is to extend support for FMF, so...
Add FIXMEs. @hfinkel, do I understand your comment correctly that this patch is
good to go?
Jan 17 2017
- Take individual UnsafeAlgebra flags into account.
Jan 13 2017
Thanks! We generally use CHECK-LABEL only for the start of a function, not for labels inside a function. The idea is that the label helps FileCheck get less confused when there are many sub-tests in a single test file.
The approach is unfortunately not correct in general as far as I can tell. Say you have
Jan 12 2017
I don't see the change that merges the FP_EXTEND / FP_ROUND cases. But the end result LGTM.
Jan 11 2017
This looks like it's missing a rebase onto the rest of the series.
A test case would be good. Apart from that, LGTM.
One minor comment, LGTM otherwise.
Dec 16 2016
Dec 12 2016
Thank you for taking a look!
Dec 9 2016
Dec 8 2016
Thank you for taking a look.
Dec 7 2016
- Use an enum instead of OnlyLegalOrCustom
- Handle a corner case where shift amounts are too large for the native shift type
- Test case using alloca
- Unify getting the MUBUF instruction offset
Obsoleted by changes to D27346.
Don't split the files, just double the RUN lines in the existing files.
Dec 2 2016
Dec 1 2016
Rearrange the logic. It looks quite readable to me this way, and
clang-format-diff agrees with the formatting.
Nov 30 2016
Rebased on D27260.
Nov 28 2016
I agree, this is a nice conceptual simplification. LGTM.
Get rid of DL to avoid possible confusion with dl.
Nov 24 2016
Rebase on latest version of D24956.
Nov 23 2016
Fix thinko switching signed/unsigned Has[US]MUL_LOHI and HasMULH[US] check
Add assertion that HalfType is legal.
Thank you for taking a look.
- Clarify that the set of threads is target-dependent (I'm still open to eliminating that paragraph outright if people find it confusing)
- Talk about executions of functions
- No mention of concurrency or simultaneous execution (except for the motivational explanation in the first paragraph), per @mehdi_amini
- Add an explicit paragraph about calling functions containing call-sites with convergent function parameters
Nov 21 2016
Nov 18 2016
Editing changes and s/run/execution/ alternative.