[PATCH] Loop Rerolling Pass

[Renato Golin]

On 15 October 2013 21:55, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:

> If the loop was manually unrolled because non-trivial dependencies would
> have prevented the compiler from doing so, then those same dependencies
> should prevent the rerolling.
>

Exactly.


We probably should do it by default when compiling for code size.
>

Yes. And with the vectorizer turned on when in -Os, this should also help
performance.


Otherwise, we may want to use it as a utility function from the loop
> vectorizer (and other relevant loop transformations) so that we only reroll
> if we'll be doing something non-trivial with the result.
>

+1.

cheers,
--renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131016/c8029901/attachment.html>