On 2/07/2014, 22:17 , Tyler Nowicki wrote:
@@ -1241,8 +1258,7 @@
LoopVectorizationLegality LVL(L, SE, DL, DT, TLI, F);
if (!LVL.canVectorize()) {
DEBUG(dbgs() << "LV: Not vectorizing: Cannot prove legality.\n");
- emitOptimizationRemarkMissed(F->getContext(), DEBUG_TYPE, *F,
- L->getStartLoc(), Hints.emitRemark());
+ emitMissedWarning(F, L, Hints);
This change is raising the severity of this diagnostic. Do we really
want to cause build failures in this situation when the code is built
with -Werror?
I think I would be fine with it, if this diagnostic was only triggered
when the user specified a #pragma, but if the failure is in the
vectorizer, with no hints from the user, then I think a warning is too
strong. Even when using #pragma, I'm not sure I'd like a warning here.
return false;
}
@@ -1276,8 +1292,7 @@
emitOptimizationRemarkAnalysis(
F->getContext(), DEBUG_TYPE, *F, L->getStartLoc(),
"loop not vectorized due to NoImplicitFloat attribute");
- emitOptimizationRemarkMissed(F->getContext(), DEBUG_TYPE, *F,
- L->getStartLoc(), Hints.emitRemark());
+ emitMissedWarning(F, L, Hints);
Likewise.
Diego.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
