Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Apple, Google Agree On More SLP Vectorization

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,650

    Default Apple, Google Agree On More SLP Vectorization

    Phoronix: Apple, Google Agree On More SLP Vectorization

    After making more widespread use of the Loop Vectorizer, developers at Apple in Google are at least agreeing that LLVM's SLP Vectorizer should be more widely-used as well...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQyMjE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Chandler is forgetting that's probably harder to read when debugging, that's probably why -O3 and not everywhere. One needs to be able to debug the program, obviously.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Seriously?

    They agree?

    Nadev is doing the heavy lifting at Apple. Whether or not Google agrees is irrelevant. Facts bare out and LLVM isn't managed or steered by Google.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    Chandler is forgetting that's probably harder to read when debugging, that's probably why -O3 and not everywhere. One needs to be able to debug the program, obviously.
    How about -O0 or -O1?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    How about -O0 or -O1?
    I understand "everywhere" as "every optimization flags or no optimization flags". So, everywhere means for debugging you need to know how to read this instruction sets. Maybe it should be -O3 and -O2, for example, but that's hardly "everywhere".

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I understand "everywhere" as "every optimization flags or no optimization flags". So, everywhere means for debugging you need to know how to read this instruction sets. Maybe it should be -O3 and -O2, for example, but that's hardly "everywhere".
    Well, since most people use -O2 when building for release, adding it to -O2 would more or less mean "everywhere". I really don't think they would be crazy enough to add this to -O0.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •