[PATCH] D94946: [ARM] Expand vXi1 VSELECT's

Sjoerd Meijer via Phabricator via llvm-commits llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jan 18 23:37:51 PST 2021


SjoerdMeijer added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/ARM/arith-overflow.ll:387
 ; MVE-RECIP-NEXT:  Cost Model: Found an estimated cost of 74 for instruction: %V2I64 = call { <2 x i64>, <2 x i1> } @llvm.ssub.with.overflow.v2i64(<2 x i64> undef, <2 x i64> undef)
-; MVE-RECIP-NEXT:  Cost Model: Found an estimated cost of 166 for instruction: %V4I64 = call { <4 x i64>, <4 x i1> } @llvm.ssub.with.overflow.v4i64(<4 x i64> undef, <4 x i64> undef)
-; MVE-RECIP-NEXT:  Cost Model: Found an estimated cost of 582 for instruction: %V8I64 = call { <8 x i64>, <8 x i1> } @llvm.ssub.with.overflow.v8i64(<8 x i64> undef, <8 x i64> undef)
+; MVE-RECIP-NEXT:  Cost Model: Found an estimated cost of 242 for instruction: %V4I64 = call { <4 x i64>, <4 x i1> } @llvm.ssub.with.overflow.v4i64(<4 x i64> undef, <4 x i64> undef)
+; MVE-RECIP-NEXT:  Cost Model: Found an estimated cost of 866 for instruction: %V8I64 = call { <8 x i64>, <8 x i1> } @llvm.ssub.with.overflow.v8i64(<8 x i64> undef, <8 x i64> undef)
----------------
More of a curiosity, how was this lowered before? Given the added codegen tests, I guess this is not only a cost-model tweak? And some of these costs are extremely high. Do they make sense?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D94946/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D94946



More information about the llvm-commits mailing list