Rename metadata llvm.loop.vectorize.unroll to llvm.loop.vectorize.interleave

[Hal Finkel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Arnold Schwaighofer" <aschwaighofer at apple.com>
> To: "Mark Heffernan" <meheff at google.com>
> Cc: "Tyler Nowicki" <tnowicki at apple.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "nadav" <nadav at apple.com>, "llvm-commits"
> <llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>, "llvm cfe" <cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 4:13:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Rename metadata llvm.loop.vectorize.unroll to llvm.loop.vectorize.interleave
> 
> The llvm patch LGTM.
> 
> 
> The clang patch seems obvious, too.
> 
> 

I agree. Both patches are good to commit.

 -Hal

> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 21, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Mark Heffernan < meheff at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Any comments this renaming patch? It'd be good to get this in before
> the cut. Thanks!
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Mark Heffernan < meheff at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Tyler Nowicki < tnowicki at apple.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like the llvm patch was accidentally overwritten by the clang
> patch.
> 
> 
> Whoops. Sorry. Here are both patches again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 18, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Mark Heffernan < meheff at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the updated patches. llvm.loop.vectorize.interleave is now
> llvm.loop.interleave.count.
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Mark Heffernan < meheff at google.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Tyler Nowicki < tnowicki at apple.com >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Perhaps you could rename ‘loop.vectorize.unroll' to
> ‘loop.interleave.count'. That way in a future patch we could add
> ‘loop.interleave.enable'.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds reasonable. Happy to change it to whatever is most
> appropriate.
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler
> 
> 
> On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov > wrote:
> 
> > Nadav, Arnold,
> > 
> > I think this makes sense. Do either of you object?
> > 
> > -Hal
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Mark Heffernan" < meheff at google.com >
> >> To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu , "cfe-commits" <
> >> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu >, "Hal Finkel" < hfinkel at anl.gov >,
> >> "Tyler
> >> Nowicki" < tnowicki at apple.com >
> >> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 3:44:00 PM
> >> Subject: Rename metadata llvm.loop.vectorize.unroll to
> >> llvm.loop.vectorize.interleave
> >> 
> >> 
> >> This patch rename metadata llvm.loop.vectorize.unroll to
> >> llvm.loop.vectorize.interleave to avoid confusion with the
> >> concatenation unroller metadata (llvm.loop.unroll). It fell out of
> >> a
> >> discussion on patch http://reviews.llvm.org/D4576 . On that patch
> >> there was some confusion about whether llvm.loop.vectorize.unroll
> >> controlled the traditional (concatenation) loop unroller. And IIRC
> >> this isn't the first time there has been this confusion. Renaming
> >> vectorize.unroll to vectorize.interleave also more closely matches
> >> the pragma which generates the metadata (#pragma clang loop
> >> interleave_count). There are still lots of uses of "unroll" within
> >> the code in function/variable names and comments. I have no
> >> intention of changing those.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Mark
> > 
> > --
> > Hal Finkel
> > Assistant Computational Scientist
> > Leadership Computing Facility
> > Argonne National Laboratory
> 
> 
> 
> <rename.llvm.patch> <rename.clang.patch>
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory