Re: [eigen] a few more points... |

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives ]

*To*: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: [eigen] a few more points...*From*: "Gael Guennebaud" <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:40:14 +0100*Dkim-signature*: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=1VjQ7EYZ9JnBiZqPpuP9/wek0zZoGjq7cHtokaNnDP4=; b=nyYMHPoxuallcpgQCcQrlcT9FHiGOZ+BL6ldBsYvdUQkLTmviuDiV+CC7iTYe7lEot TZIifg4kkJVKL43dTd/VWYeQCaQdXPcZK4711/qYg0irGbUTFSL3IHRFW4X6Aj/h1EWY Q5/QyPGyFYklprxq70REPOYMfeKIZ6emCWvvM=*Domainkey-signature*: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=ZiUbJfvrNxD4DhtAeFvCsdLg6mtSTztr2M5lQoR9Yt0XtFRO0PoJ4T41aNrt3b1ulD N6CsMcsaJIDLoOZtB+U48j5M+5iLTVGKtSvs/flvQhO7K18+OIS7A5nkHxeWwE1/DkZy OHXFtp39tM1O/F+VqvqODjDXeGrXj6/sbTQa8=

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2009/1/3 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>: >>>> and I don't think that's safe to add AlignedBit if we have >>>> ForceAligned, eg: >>>> >>>> Matrix4d m1; >>>> m1.block<2,2>(1,0) *= 2; >>>> >>>> will take the "LinearVectorization with CompleteUnrolling" path and crash. >>> >>> The block expression here doesn't have the LinearAccessBit because it >>> isn't a vector. So this assignment shouldn't take the >>> LinearVectorization path. >> >> right, so it will take the "InnerVectorization with CompleteUnrolling" >> and still crash. > > ok, now I understand. But the point is, with code such as >>>> Matrix4d m1; >>>> m1.block<2,2>(1,0) *= 2; > I would never have thought of using ForceAligned. But now I understand > your explanation, there are other examples like you say where we want > ForceAligned but not Aligned flag, like when one does aligned accesses > in a non-aligned block. actually, in that example ForceAligned is automatically set by Eigen, but of course, for such a small block it is useless because the vectorized path won't be taken. So just to make it clear, let's take another example: VectorXf a(1000), b(150); a.segment(3,150) += b; in that case, ForceAligned is still automatically set by Eigen for the subvector of "a" (in MapBase) which allow to perform read operation from a.segment(3,150) in an aligned fashion. This is because in Assign.h we guarantee that store operations are always aligned. ---

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [eigen] a few more points...***From:*Benoit Jacob

**References**:**[eigen] a few more points...***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] a few more points...***From:*Gael Guennebaud

**Re: [eigen] a few more points...***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Re: [eigen] a few more points...***From:*Gael Guennebaud

**Re: [eigen] a few more points...***From:*Benoit Jacob

**Messages sorted by:**[ date | thread ]- Prev by Date:
**Re: [eigen] a few more points...** - Next by Date:
**Re: [eigen] a few more points...** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [eigen] a few more points...** - Next by thread:
**Re: [eigen] a few more points...**

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ | http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/ |