<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">IMHO the current plan at least gives an improvement over what there is right now. When the current parts are done I guess time will have come re-assess:<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">a) complex pattern matching capability (clamp etc) + speculation in SimplifyCFG</div><div class="">"</div><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex;"><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">5. To make sure the clamp() idiom got matched, I upped the amount that SimplifyCFG would speculate (in r229099). This caused some slight controversy - it is still in-tree but there is still the potential of pulling it out if it is found that it was too aggressive. The IR approach means we don't actually need it and can pattern match across basic blocks, which we can't do in ISel (and it'd be too late by then because all the vectorizers will have bailed out).</div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class="">That is the strongest argument I see so far. There is a dependence between optimizations. And the example will come where there is just not enough speculation in SimplifyCFG for the next pattern to get recognized.</div></blockquote><div class="">Right. min+min+min (horizontal reduce) won't currently get speculated. "</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">b) remaining issues w/ code hygiene and cost model.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Cheers</div><div class="">Gerolf</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Apr 26, 2015, at 2:15 AM, James Molloy <<a href="mailto:james@jamesmolloy.co.uk" class="">james@jamesmolloy.co.uk</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex;"><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">5. To make sure the clamp() idiom got matched, I upped the amount that SimplifyCFG would speculate (in r229099). This caused some slight controversy - it is still in-tree but there is still the potential of pulling it out if it is found that it was too aggressive. The IR approach means we don't actually need it and can pattern match across basic blocks, which we can't do in ISel (and it'd be too late by then because all the vectorizers will have bailed out).</div></div></div></blockquote><div style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class=""><div class="">That is the strongest argument I see so far. There is a dependence between optimizations. And the example will come where there is just not enough speculation in SimplifyCFG for the next pattern to get recognized.</div></div></div></blockquote><div class="">Right. min+min+min (horizontal reduce) won't currently get speculated. </div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>