[PATCH] D88962: [SVE] Add support for scalable vectors with vectorize.scalable.enable loop attribute

[Sjoerd Meijer via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

SjoerdMeijer added a comment.

In D88962#2402292 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88962#2402292>, @paulwalker-arm wrote:

> Thanks for the info @david-arm.  I just figured we'd support `vector_width(2), vector_width(2, fixed), vector_width(2, scalable), vector_width(fixed), vector_width(scalable)` so I still say splitting the width property across multiple pragmas is against our goal of moving away from fixed length only representations. That said, if this is the consensus then so be it.

I won't block D89031 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D89031> and would be happy to be convinced otherwise, but I don't see any advantages of D89031 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D89031>, in fact I see only disadvantages.

The approach here looks good to me; have inlined a question.



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/LangRef.rst:5930
 
+'``llvm.loop.vectorize.scalable.enable``' Metadata
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
----------------
I am wondering if we need to describe if and how this interacts with `llvm.loop.vectorize.enable`?


================
Comment at: llvm/test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/no_array_bounds_scalable.ll:65
+
+attributes #0 = { nofree norecurse nounwind "disable-tail-calls"="false" "frame-pointer"="non-leaf" "less-precise-fpmad"="false" "min-legal-vector-width"="0" "no-infs-fp-math"="false" "no-jump-tables"="false" "no-nans-fp-math"="false" "no-signed-zeros-fp-math"="false" "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="generic" "target-features"="+neon" "unsafe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float"="false" }
+
----------------
nit: we probably don't need all of this.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D88962/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D88962