>> I would object to anyone trying to push forward an autovec implementation >> into >> gcc-13. We're well past that point IMHO, even if the changes only >> affected the RISC-V backend.
Yes, I am agree with Jeff's opinion. I finished infrastructure (intrinsic and VSETVL PASS) of RVV now. Now, I am pulling as many resources as possible to do the testing. From now to April (until GCC 14 is open), I will only keep testing and fix bugs or some codes refine && simplification. I won't push any more features especially autovec until GCC 14 is open. juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Jeff Law Date: 2023-02-23 12:01 To: Michael Collison; juzhe.zhong; gcc-patches CC: kito.cheng; kito.cheng; richard.sandiford; richard.guenther Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Check that vector factor is a compile-time constant On 2/22/23 10:54, Michael Collison wrote: > Juzhe, > > I disagree with this comment. There are many stakeholders for > autovectorization and waiting until GCC 14 is not a viable solution for > us as well as other stakeholders ready to begin work on autovectorization. > > As we discussed I have been moving forward with patches for > autovectorization and am preparing to send them to gcc-patches. This > assert is preventing code from compiling and needs to be addressed. > > If you have a solution in either the RISCV backend or in this file can > you please present it? I don't necessarily think it means waiting for gcc-14, but it does mean waiting for gcc-13 to branch and gcc-14 development to open. I would object to anyone trying to push forward an autovec implementation into gcc-13. We're well past that point IMHO, even if the changes only affected the RISC-V backend. Given that it looks like we have two independent implementations we're almost certainly going to have to sit down with both, evaluate both from a quality of code viewpoint and benchmark them both and ultimately choose one implementation or the other, or maybe even some mixing and matching. I would strongly suggest that both groups have implementations we can start evaluating from a design/implementation standpoint relatively soon. Ideally both groups would actually have branches in the repo that are regularly updated with their current implementation. While I have a great interest in seeing an autovec implementation move forward as soon as possible after gcc-14 development opens, I have no opinions at this point about either of the two existing implementations. Jeff
