[llvm] [LV] Prefer fixed VFs for epilogue vectorization (PR #211814)

[David Sherwood via llvm-commits]

================
@@ -706,6 +706,21 @@ bool LoopVectorizationPlanner::isMoreProfitable(const VectorizationFactor &A,
         !B.Width.isScalar())
       return true;
 
+  // Prefer fixed VFs for epilogue loops (unless the fixed cost is much more
+  // expensive -- >= 2x). There are some extra costs for using scalable vectors
+  // in epilogues (e.g., reduced post-vectorization unrolling) that are not
+  // represented in the cost. TODO: Reconsider this restriction for predicated
+  // epilogues (once supported).
+  if (IsEpilogue && A.Width.isScalable() != B.Width.isScalable() &&
----------------
david-arm wrote:

Why don't we also need a `B.Cost.isValid()`? The maths below only makes sense if both costs are valid.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/211814