Re: [PATCH 2/8] Introduce VECT_SCOPE macro

[David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>]

On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:11 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 02:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > The vectorizer code has numerous instances of:
> > 
> >   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> >     dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
> >                      "=== some message ===\n");
> > 
> > In each case, the dump_printf_loc is a MSG_NODE at vect_location.
> > 
> > In almost all cases the message is of the form
> >   "=== foo ===\n"
> > 
> > The exceptions are:
> >   "===== analyze_loop_nest =====\n"
> > which uses 4 equal signs rather than 3, and
> >   "===vect_slp_analyze_bb===\n"
> > which is missing the spaces.
> > 
> > In most cases (but not always) the message matches the function
> > name.
> > 
> > This patch replaces all of these with a macro, taking the message
> > as an argument (and forcing the use of three dashes and a space).
> > 
> > The idea is to later convert this macro to use an RAII type
> > that pushes and pops scope, so that the nesting structure appears
> > in the dumpfile and -fopt-info logs (and in the remarks and
> > optimization records introduced later in this patch kit).
> > 
> > The message is usually the function name, but not always.
> > Should I split this out into two macros? e.g. a VECT_FUNCTION_SCOPE
> > that uses __FUNCTION__?
> > 
> > Would DUMP_VECT_SCOPE be a better name, perhaps?
> > 
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > 	* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_analyze_data_ref_dependences):
> > 	Replace dump_printf_loc call with VECT_SCOPE.
> > 	(vect_slp_analyze_instance_dependence): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_data_refs_alignment): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_slp_analyze_and_verify_instance_alignment
> > 	(vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_prune_runtime_alias_test_list): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_data_refs): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vect-loop-manip.c (vect_update_inits_of_drs): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vect-loop.c (vect_determine_vectorization_factor):
> > Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_scalar_cycles_1): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_get_loop_niters): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_loop_form_1): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_update_vf_for_slp): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_loop_operations): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_analyze_loop): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_induction): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_transform_loop): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vect-patterns.c (vect_pattern_recog): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_analyze_slp): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_make_slp_decision): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_detect_hybrid_slp): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_slp_analyze_operations): Likewise.
> > 	(vect_slp_bb): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vect-stmts.c (vect_mark_stmts_to_be_vectorized):
> > Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_bswap): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_call): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_simd_clone_call): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_conversion): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_assignment): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_shift): Likewise.
> > 	(vectorizable_operation): Likewise.
> > 	* tree-vectorizer.h (VECT_SCOPE): New macro.
> 
> OK.  But rather than using a macro, *consider* just using a normal
> function.  I'm less and less inclined to use macros as I get older :-
> )
> 
> If there's a solid reason to use a macro, then that's fine.

The reason for doing it as a macro is that I'm planning to turn this
into an RAII-style class for pushing and popping scopes, capturing the
nesting.  That wouldn't work if it was a function.

> DUMP_VECT_SCOPE seems better than VEC_SCOPE.

Thanks.  I've committed the DUMP_VECT_SCOPE version of the patch as
r261710 (after usual testing)

Dave