Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ESIMD] Add esimd::merge free function. #5308

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jan 19, 2022
Merged

Conversation

kbobrovs
Copy link
Contributor

@kbobrovs kbobrovs commented Jan 14, 2022

Also, remove deprecation note from the 'simd_mask_impl(const simd<T, N> &Val)'
constructor, as it is used when loading a mask from memory, and is otherwise
useful constructor.

E2E test: intel/llvm-test-suite#739

Signed-off-by: Konstantin S Bobrovsky konstantin.s.bobrovsky@intel.com

Also, remove deprecation note from the 'simd_mask_impl(const simd<T, N> &Val)'
constructor, as it is used when loading a mask from memory, and is otherwise
useful constructor.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin S Bobrovsky <konstantin.s.bobrovsky@intel.com>
sndmitriev
sndmitriev previously approved these changes Jan 14, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@sndmitriev sndmitriev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.

__ESIMD_API auto merge(simd_view<BaseT1, RegionT1> v1,
simd_view<BaseT2, RegionT2> v2,
simd_mask<shape_type<RegionT1>::length> m) {
return merge(v1.read(), v2.read(), m);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the usage of the mask here consistent with the other two overloads?

The first two use a.merge(b, m), and the documentation says "The semantic is that if the LSB of an element of Mask is set, then the corresponding data element of Val is copied to the corresponding position in the calling simd object." -- b is copied if m is true.

This one uses merge(a, b, m), and the documentation says "The semantic is that if the LSB of an element of Mask is set, then the corresponding data element of Val1 is copied to the corresponding position in the calling simd object".

Am I reading the documentation wrong, or should this be merge(b, a, m) to match the semantics?

(A simpler way to ask the same question might be: is the behavior of this two-input version of merge the same as the two-input member function?)

Copy link
Contributor Author

@kbobrovs kbobrovs Jan 15, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the catch of this discrepancy in the documentation, John. The actual behavior is that any non-zero in a mask element (e.g. 0x8) is considered as "enabled", so this version is correct, and the one is not. I'm working on updating the documentation, so I will address this.
The behavior is consistent across all versions/overloads of merge, as those ones are implemented through the other.

@kbobrovs
Copy link
Contributor Author

@intel/dpcpp-esimd-reviewers , ping

@kbobrovs kbobrovs merged commit 19c327f into intel:sycl Jan 19, 2022
@kbobrovs kbobrovs deleted the free_merge branch January 19, 2022 22:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants