+/// LoopHints - This provides the interface
+/// for specifying and retrieving vectorize and interleave hints
+///
+class LoopHints {

Comments should be punctuated properly. 


   SourceLocation WhileLoc;
+
 public:
   WhileStmt(con

Please don’t change white space in unrelated places in the file. 

+
+    // Attach metadata to loop body conditional branch
+    if (S.hasCondBrLoopHints())
+    {
+      llvm::MDNode *LoopID = getLoopHints(LoopBody->getContext(),

The brace should be on the same line as the ‘if’.

Thanks,
Nadav




On Apr 22, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Tyler Nowicki <[email protected]> wrote:

> Please review this updated patch. It includes the changes we discussed. 
> Thanks for all your input!
> 
> Tyler
> 
> <pragma_vectorize-svn.patch>
> 
> 
> On Apr 22, 2014, at 2:30 PM, Tyler Nowicki <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Hal,
>> 
>> Thanks for the reply.
>> 
>>> Maybe we're looking at this the wrong way... what about?
>>> 
>>> pragma loop vectorize(width/enable/disable) interleave(count/enable/disable)
>> 
>> I like this more, especially because its clear it applies only to loops.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> enable/disable don’t add
>>>> anything that isn’t already part of pragma vectorize enable/disable,
>>>> and specifying `#pragma vectorize disable’ would disable
>>>> interleaving.
>>> 
>>> But that's a bug. Are you sure that's what happens?
>> 
>> I could be mistaken. This is what is in LoopVectorize at the top of 
>> processLoop()
>> 
>>     if (Hints.Force == 0) {
>>       DEBUG(dbgs() << "LV: Not vectorizing: #pragma vectorize disable.\n");
>>       return false;
>>     }
>> 
>> And the unrolling occurs later in processLoop(). I thought it was a feature… 
>> but yea, lets fix it.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As for safety, how about #pragma vectorize aggressive?
>>> 
>>> I don't like that; *that* sounds like a cost-model adjustment. The user is 
>>> asserting something about the property of the loop, and we should try to 
>>> capture that property. Although this may just be confusing, "vectorizable" 
>>> is what we mean.
>> 
>> `nodependence’? 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Tyler
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
> 

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to