From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29A373858414
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon,  6 Sep 2021 12:43:52 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 29A373858414
Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id g21so9387050edw.4
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 06 Sep 2021 05:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=OFSIa29SJT3fbZ0VoLqX9BFJF1WPGcsx/KebegpNEYI=;
 b=uOkVxgRG3S//Z+Gz4enMnUykoNtaYtnxkj6O4cUM18LkYgC2YjuGrgws3FtdNBOa8v
 sIq6tp/ojDRqIBXR4lmZVj0mrTzaIeJYrxfwVetYWKqs/ZrvuClEJuPFQxRyodZo3slB
 xSU8D3vAMdrknYzqXZJ5rWw+uyLiWRYloAqDD0X6d7PdStkos2cgRaLrecVzYXbYFv9M
 vhhU+EkRaVtjB4NsPHMPzrGDoQkql0gaEFXsjSvbwzWBWB2UF5lys/GKSrau0QiwZLYu
 QdD9XRynQG1akK140iQS97FY3mb9OSmrs56/N+wj3/kZQOViWt7S45cI7ydbVzQHfM7L
 JrAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5323Ov/s+ycXE09sYMAwX9QX5hWO8N4G90NYeUZJC7ivfmjqyY9d
 wtsR3GwrJEMwvO46v+hedHemIeKJTnBdCuC35uI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw51tCSVthaQ4xoH1LT4ZviNttgDoujLwuciz39M0v3MJ5MzmoaYs4nV1BqtQxpKEnb05mzhazn+/nBT/IuYiI=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:ed0b:: with SMTP id j11mr13133600eds.97.1630932231290; 
 Mon, 06 Sep 2021 05:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210906084614.7974-1-hongtao.liu@intel.com>
 <CAFiYyc0NZDnAki3nAi_G6tETHXqMQC3oOVXedyCZbDmb4T4C4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210906094127.GQ920497@tucnak>
 <CAMZc-byX8aP=VraOxBd=zAvA0aW8n=++BbW5+Z+K1KVHg=a57A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210906110141.GS920497@tucnak>
 <CAMZc-bz5ZWDUZB-0X+KzXa8dspufBkQ9EFZBjtgdTWQCvbFtvQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210906111512.GT920497@tucnak>
 <CAFiYyc1b9O9tKKWfBUsF-J9pwtJq9h3eFfbdfXLr7_PzWJrwLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210906123024.GX920497@tucnak>
In-Reply-To: <20210906123024.GX920497@tucnak>
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:43:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc2PCPu1is4ySAeCqrV+XVuycOCMnMYS_yS_-9yKaNBKhg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable auto-vectorization at O2 with very-cheap cost
 model.
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
 Hongtao Liu <crazylht@gmail.com>, 
 liuhongt <hongtao.liu@intel.com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
 SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2021 12:43:53 -0000

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 2:30 PM Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 02:18:59PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 1:15 PM Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:15:41PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > > > So what about finish_options then?
> > > > > default_options_optimization has only a single caller that then calls
> > > > > read_cmdline_options and then finish_options.
> > > > in finish_options
> > > > (gdb) p opts_set->x_flag_tree_loop_vectorize
> > > > $37 = 1
> > > > with -O2 -ftree-loop-vectorize,
> > > >
> > > > but
> > > > 1000   if (opts->x_dump_base_name
> > > > (gdb) p opts_set->x_flag_tree_loop_vectorize
> > > > $38 = 0
> > > > for -O2 -ftree-vectorize???
> > > >
> > > > Any magic  for ftree-vectorize w/ EnabledBy???
> > >
> > > I guess a way to get this working would be:
> > >  ; Alias to enable both -ftree-loop-vectorize and -ftree-slp-vectorize.
> > >  ftree-vectorize
> > > -Common Optimization
> > > +Common Var(flag_tree_vectorize) Optimization
> > >  Enable vectorization on trees.
> > >
> > > and then you can test both
> > > opts_set->x_flag_tree_vectorize
> > > and
> > > opts_set->x_flag_tree_loop_vectorize
> >
> > Or make EnabledBy have set opts_set-> as well.
>
> That would change a little bit what *_set->x_* means.
>
> If user has explicit -O2, we have *_set->x_optimize set,
> but don't enable it on all the suboptions that are implicitly
> enabled because explicit -O2 has been used.
> And isn't EnabledBy practically the same?  If user writes
> -Wall explicitly which implicitly enables hundreds of warning
> options, do we want just Wall or also all the other options
> marked as explicit?  E.g. backend code than can't easily differentiate
> between -Wwhatever and -Wall implying -Wwhatever and e.g. changing that
> if implicit only.

Hmm, good point.

Richard.

>
>         Jakub
>