On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 16:20 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > > I remember having this discussion, and I was looking for
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > I remember having this discussion, and I was looking for it to check on
> > > the details, but I can't seem to find it either in
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > I remember having this discussion, and I was looking for it to check on
> > the details, but I can't seem to find it either in my inbox or in the
> > archives. Can you please point me
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 12:10 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 13:49 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 12:10 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 13:49 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 12:08 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 12:08 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general ide
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 13:49 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general ide
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
> > I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 13:49 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
> > I'd like us to move more of the cost
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
>
> Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
> I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail to the target, giving
> it a chance to look at the whole loop
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:38 PM, William J. Schmidt
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 11:09 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> > Well, they are at least magic numbers and heuristics that apply
>> > generally and not only to the single
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 11:09 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > Well, they are at least magic numbers and heuristics that apply
> > generally and not only to the single issue in sphinx. And in
> > fact how it works for sphinx _is_ magi
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 16:58 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Well, they are at least magic numbers and heuristics that apply
> generally and not only to the single issue in sphinx. And in
> fact how it works for sphinx _is_ magic.
>
>> Second, I suggest that you need to rephrase "I can make you"
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > > This patch adds a heuristic to the vectorizer when estimating the
> > >
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Richard Guenther
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. I
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
>> > I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
> > I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail to the target, giving
> > it a chance to look at the whole loop b
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > This patch adds a heuristic to the vectorizer when estimating the
> > > minimum profitable number of iterations. The heuristic i
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead
> I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail to the target, giving
> it a chance to look at the whole loop before deciding on a cost. ISTR
> posting the overall
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > This patch adds a heuristic to the vectorizer when estimating the
> > minimum profitable number of iterations. The heuristic is
> > target-dependent, and is currently disabled for all
On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> This patch adds a heuristic to the vectorizer when estimating the
> minimum profitable number of iterations. The heuristic is
> target-dependent, and is currently disabled for all targets except
> PowerPC. However, the intent is to make it general
23 matches
Mail list logo
