[PATCH] support llvm.vectorization.vector_width metadata

[罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo)]

在 2013-5-25 上午3:58，"Du Toit, Stefanus" <stefanus.du.toit at intel.com>写道：
>
> <bikeshed>
> I think "llvm.vectorize.*" would be a
+1 for this, one question, did this means to getting the loop operation to
be vectorized, so that cpu can execute WIDTH iteration in parallel,
I don't like the form llvm.vectorization.vector_width because vector
appeared twice.

better name that hopefully strikes a
> good balance between brevity and making the intent clear.
>
> These are instructions to the vectorizer to tell it how to handle the
> loop, not statements about the loop.
> </bikeshed>
>
> --
> Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.du.toit at intel.com>
> Intel Waterloo
> Phone: 519-591-1738
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2013-05-24 3:46 PM, "Redmond, Paul" <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm fine with llvm.vector.width. Anyone object?
> >
> >On 2013-05-24, at 2:45 PM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) wrote:
> >
> >Is that really need such a long name?
> >why llvm.vector.width is not suite here?
> >along with
> >llvm.vector.force
> >llvm.vector.disable
> >llvm.vector.unroll
> >?
> >
> >I know vectorization is a named verb, and have different meaning with
> >vector.
> >but still vector is really simpler.
> >
> >
> >
> >2013/5/25 Arnold Schwaighofer
> ><aschwaighofer at apple.com<mailto:aschwaighofer at apple.com>>
> >That would be great. I think the following annotations would be useful:
> >
> >llvm.vectorization.unroll
> >llvm.vectorization.force (vectorize without consulting the cost model)
> >llvm.vectorization.disable (don’t vectorize)
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >On May 24, 2013, at 1:25 PM, "Redmond, Paul"
> ><paul.redmond at intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at intel.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> Sure. Should I also add support for llvm.vectorization.unroll? Are
> >>there any other obvious hints?
> >>
> >> On 2013-05-24, at 2:22 PM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On May 24, 2013, at 12:49 PM, "Redmond, Paul"
> >>><paul.redmond at intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at intel.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> The attached patch modifies LoopVectorizer to recognize
> >>>>llvm.vectorization.vector_width metadata attached to llvm.loop
> >>>>metadata.
> >>>>
> >>>> The llvm.loop.parallel metadata has been renamed to llvm.loop to be
> >>>>more generic. Loop::isAnnotatedParallel now looks for llvm.loop and
> >>>>associated llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access. If we decide that we still
> >>>>need an explicit llvm.loop.parallel metadata then it can be added as a
> >>>>child of llvm.loop.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Can you also include an update to the LangRef.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Loop::setLoopID was added for symmetry and it is used in a
> >>>>forthcoming patch which preserves llvm.loop metadata in loop passes.
> >>>>
> >>>> paul
> >>>>
> >>>> <Mail Attachment>_______________________________________________
> >>>> llvm-commits mailing list
> >>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> >>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >llvm-commits mailing list
> >llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
> >http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >         此致
> >礼
> >罗勇刚
> >Yours
> >    sincerely,
> >Yonggang Luo
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >llvm-commits mailing list
> >llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> >http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20130525/a3e48798/attachment.html>