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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Initial Implementation for the new WASM based instruction set #946

Closed
wants to merge 57 commits into from
Closed

Initial Implementation for the new WASM based instruction set #946

wants to merge 57 commits into from

Conversation

anutosh491
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@anutosh491 anutosh491 marked this pull request as draft October 2, 2023 11:28
@serge-sans-paille
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks a lot for working on this!
From a methodological point of view (and to ease the work of the reviewer) it would be great if you could focus on a single test file, have it validate, then we can merge the PR and move on to more test. Do you think it's a viable approach?

@JohanMabille
Copy link
Member

JohanMabille commented Oct 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Yes, the initial idea was to have all the basic arithmetic operations first (more or less everything tested in https://github.com/xtensor-stack/xsimd/blob/master/test/test_batch.cpp), and then find a way to reuse the already existing tests in WASM.

@anutosh491
Copy link
Contributor Author

anutosh491 commented Oct 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Thanks a lot for working on this!

Thanks for having a look. Yeah this pr branches out from #943 and I think so Thorsten is trying to port the test files and run them all considering wasm. I guess once that is done we could merge that PR and rebase this one top of that.
I think so we should be able to reuse the written tests already written in xsimd.

@serge-sans-paille
Copy link
Contributor

@anutosh491 can you rebase on latest master branch? Wasm support for CI has been merged in.

anutosh491 and others added 22 commits October 9, 2023 10:20
@anutosh491
Initial Implementation for the Wasm based instruction set
0566727
@anutosh491
Added the add instruction
a4195df
@anutosh491
Added support for set and stored_aligned operations
a8ddf8f
@anutosh491
added support any, bitwise_and, broadcast
1441b7f
@anutosh491
Added support for bitwise_andnot and bitwise_or
7cecf8f
@anutosh491
Added support for bitwise_xor and div
2dfab94
@anutosh491
Added support for load_aligned
dfbd467
@anutosh491
added support for min, max, mul and select
e044b28
@anutosh491
added support for sub
371a067
@anutosh491
Added support for store_unaligned
8ba25c7
@anutosh491
Added support for load_unaligned and sqrt operations
e1e16ca
@anutosh491
Added support for ge and le operations
409a1b3
@anutosh491
fixed implementations for abs, bitwise_and, bitwise_andnot & bitwise_xor
56b4688
@anutosh491
Fixed implementation for bitwise_xor
2e113c3
@anutosh491
added support for bitwise_lshift operation
b269501
@anutosh491
Fixing some documentation issues
a59068b
@JohanMabille @anutosh491
Upgraded clang-format-action
a93865b
@DerThorsten @anutosh491
test emscripten-32wasm in the browser (xtensor-stack#943)
fb5fa43 
added emscripten-wasm32 tests
@serge-sans-paille @anutosh491
Fix minor warnings
7239b9a 
They clutter the build output for no reason.
@serge-sans-paille @anutosh491
Add proper compile definition when XTL has been configured
4d4be50 
Basically so that -DENABLE_XTL_COMPLEX=On at configuration step implies
-DXSIMD_ENABLE_XTL_COMPLEX=1 for the tests.

Fix xtensor-stack#942
@anutosh491
applied clang format
982ca62
@anutosh491
fixed CMakeLists.txt
a729b2d
@anutosh491
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure I'll do it !

@anutosh491 anutosh491 force-pushed the Introducing_new_wasm_based_instruction_set branch from 0f50490 to ec703ba Compare October 9, 2023 06:43
@anutosh491
Copy link
Contributor Author

@serge-sans-paille Ahh I think I made a bad commit somewhere and also the commit history looks very messy here. I've pushed my changes on top of current master on a seperate branch (#952). Should make reviewing and merging more easier.

@anutosh491 anutosh491 closed this Oct 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@anutosh491 @serge-sans-paille @JohanMabille @DerThorsten