[LLVMdev] Please benchmark new x86 vector shuffle lowering, planning to make it the default very soon!

[Chandler Carruth]

As of r218038 we should get palign for all integer shuffles. That fixes the
test case you reduced for me. If you have any other regressions that point
to palignr, I'd be especially interested to have an actual test case. As I
noted in my commit log, there seems to be a clear place where using this
could be faster but it introduces domain crossing. I don't really have a
good model for the cost there and so am hesitant to go down that route
without good evidence of the need.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
wrote:

>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We use two shuffles instead of 1 palign.
>
>
> Doh! I just forgot to teach it about palign... This one should at least be
> easy.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140918/5fa21236/attachment.html>