From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90461 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2017 17:31:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 90450 invoked by uid 89); 5 Dec 2017 17:31:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:31:31 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0034B85543; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:31:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-2.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3672062677; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:31:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [060/nnn] poly_int: loop versioning threshold To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, richard.sandiford@linaro.org References: <871sltvm7r.fsf@linaro.org> <87o9oxkc9d.fsf@linaro.org> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:31:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87o9oxkc9d.fsf@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00243.txt.bz2 On 10/23/2017 11:25 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch splits the loop versioning threshold out from the > cost model threshold so that the former can become a poly_uint64. > We still use a single test to enforce both limits where possible. > > > 2017-10-23 Richard Sandiford > Alan Hayward > David Sherwood > > gcc/ > * tree-vectorizer.h (_loop_vec_info): Add a versioning_threshold > field. > (LOOP_VINFO_VERSIONING_THRESHOLD): New macro > (vect_loop_versioning): Take the loop versioning threshold as a > separate parameter. > * tree-vect-loop-manip.c (vect_loop_versioning): Likewise. > * tree-vect-loop.c (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Initialize > versioning_threshold. > (vect_analyze_loop_2): Compute the loop versioning threshold > whenever loop versioning is needed, and store it in the new > field rather than combining it with the cost model threshold. > (vect_transform_loop): Update call to vect_loop_versioning. > Try to combine the loop versioning and cost thresholds here. So you dropped the tests for PEELING_FOR_GAPS and PEELING_FOR_NITER in vect_analyze_loop_2. Was that intentional? Otherwise it looks fine. If the drop was intentional, then OK as-is. jeff