Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
LLVM 3.3 To Introduce SLP Vectorizer
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by chithanh View PostI don't think there is a lot of commercial interest left in Itanium. For example, X has been broken for several releases and nobody at Intel bothered to react.
http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-dev...er/034867.html
Intel should pony it up. They're getting far more out of using LLVM/Clang than what they'll ever contribute.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by uid313 View PostWell X is pretty much for workstations and Itanium for servers, mainframes and HPC.
I know Oracle and other companies lost commercial interest in Itanium, but have Intel too?
Itanium got a shit reputation because but it was a promising architecture.
It got bad reputation because:
* The processors (and perhaps micro architectures) were bad, this does not mean the instruction set architecture is bad.
* The compilers for IA-64 were bad and didn't output bytecode that were fast.
* Itanium contained x86-compatibility and people whined that Itanium in x86-mode were slower than real x86 processors.
The architecture seems pretty interesting though. EPIC, VLIW.
Leave a comment:
-
Itanium failed because it assumed that compile-time optimisations were sufficient for high performance. In reality you'll always need at least some degree of run-time re-ordering, etc.
Back on topic, would this vectorizer benefit GPUs? Or are they no longer so vectorized?
Leave a comment:
-
Itanium is dead. What does it matter if it's an interesting architecture? It's dead, period. So support for it must be pretty low on the priority list (if it's in the list at all.)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by chithanh View PostI don't think there is a lot of commercial interest left in Itanium. For example, X has been broken for several releases and nobody at Intel bothered to react.
http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-dev...er/034867.html
I know Oracle and other companies lost commercial interest in Itanium, but have Intel too?
Itanium got a shit reputation because but it was a promising architecture.
It got bad reputation because:
* The processors (and perhaps micro architectures) were bad, this does not mean the instruction set architecture is bad.
* The compilers for IA-64 were bad and didn't output bytecode that were fast.
* Itanium contained x86-compatibility and people whined that Itanium in x86-mode were slower than real x86 processors.
The architecture seems pretty interesting though. EPIC, VLIW.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by uid313 View PostIntel ought to add Itanium (IA-64) support to LLVM.
Leave a comment:
-
Itanium
Intel ought to add Itanium (IA-64) support to LLVM.
With all this vectorizing it sounds like a good fit.
Heard one of the problems with Itanium was bad compilers.
Leave a comment:
-
There's little difference probably because modern CPUs parallelize certain micro operations by default.Last edited by mark45; 07 May 2013, 04:21 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
LLVM 3.3 To Introduce SLP Vectorizer
Phoronix: LLVM 3.3 To Introduce SLP Vectorizer
One of the prominent features to be introduced with the LLVM 3.3 release this summer is the SLP Vectorizer. Introduced in the LLVM 3.2 release was the LLVM Loop Vectorizer for vectorizing loops while the new SLP Vectorizer is about optimizing straight-line code by merging multiple scalars into vectors.
Tags: None
Leave a comment: