[PATCH] D29449: [SLP] Generalization of vectorization of CmpInst operands, NFC.

[Alexey Bataev via llvm-commits]

The first option is not suitable, it blocks min/max reduction vectorization. 

Best regards,
Alexey Bataev

> 8 февр. 2017 г., в 0:09, Michael Kuperstein via Phabricator <reviews at reviews.llvm.org> написал(а):
> 
> mkuper added a comment.
> 
>> What should I do then?
> 
> Short term - maybe nothing?
> Is this patch blocking anything? I understand this is part of the work to support min/max reductions, but why is it necessary? Can we go forward with that without regressing any existing cases?
> 
> Longer term - it would probably be good to try to come up with a saner, or at least, more principled way to do root selection, that also doesn't cause us to look at instructions several times. I don't think adding more ad-hoc cases (CallInst) is the way to go. I'm fairly sure we can come up with other examples like this.
> 
> 
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D29449
> 
> 
>