3 ms·
I was not aware of PLUTO, thanks for the pointer (no pun intended). If you have used it could you share more. I am particularly interested in how different is t
by srean 12y ago
I was not aware of PLUTO, thanks for the pointer (no pun intended). If you have used it could you share more. I am particularly interested in how different is the speedup compared to accessin polyhedral loop optimization from inside gcc (or g++). GCC has interface to Cloog and graphite, that seem to target the same features.
With that out of the way, "can be" is a very weak statement. Almost anything "can be", what matters more is "does it now".
@DannyBee Reply appreciated.
- DannyBee 12y agoPluto's basic algorithm was implemented in ISL, and can be used by graphite. There are patches to do it. The optimizer i last remember in graphite was very basic. So you'd see much much larger speedups if you used pluto Graphite in GCC is, AFAIK, semi-abandoned. The research and future work was moved to Polly and LLVM (at least, most of the developers were hired and put to work on it). I don't know who still develops graphite for GCC, if anyone. In Polly, Polly supports both the ISL version of the algorithm and actually, linking to Pluto, but i don't have any performance numbers handy. "With that out of the way, "can be" is a very weak statement. Almost anything "can be", what matters more is "does it now". " IMHO, not really. Sure, in the sense that it's not useful if nobody ever does it. But if this was the performance problem a lot of people were having, it'd be fixed. So in that sense, it matters a lot more what can be.