[PATCH] D26873: [LV] Do not vectorize loops with a low dynamic tripcount, as determined by profile information

[Michael Kuperstein via llvm-commits]

mkuper added inline comments.


================
Comment at: test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/X86/runtime-trip-count.ll:2
+; RUN: opt < %s  -loop-vectorize -force-vector-interleave=1 -force-vector-width=4 -S -debug-only=loop-vectorize 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
+; REQUIRES: asserts
+
----------------
anemet wrote:
> mkuper wrote:
> > anemet wrote:
> > > We usually try to formulate these tests without relying on asserts so that we get coverage with a no-assert build as well.
> > I realize that, but from a testing perspective, I actually want to verify the reason it didn't get vectorized, not only that it's not vectorized.
> > Do you think it would be better to duplicate the test and have an asserts and a non-asserts version? Do you know if "UNSUPPORTED: asserts" works?
> > 
> > (Is there a way to require asserts only for a specific run line, as opposed to the whole test? That would solve the problem.)
> I'd say just use opt remarks then (-pass-remarks-missed=loop-vectorize).  In the opt output, you won't have the function name (only the source line but that required debug info).  If you want the function name, you could generate the YAML output which has everything including the function name.
Ok, I guess opt remarks is a reasonable solution. I don't actually need the function name, since I only care about seeing a remark for the low case.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D26873