Sure thing, let's add new param to address this issue first, and defer the config file things to next stage-1, will send v2 soon.
Pan -----Original Message----- From: Robin Dapp <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 3:10 AM To: Li, Pan2 <[email protected]>; Jeffrey Law <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Chen, Ken <[email protected]>; Liu, Hongtao <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] RISC-V: Bugfix adjust_stmt_cost doesn't honor param=gpr2vr-cost [PR123916] > The middle-end pass NULL_TREE in previous, and then skip the adjust_stmt_cost > step which has count the cost of vr2gpr. > After Richard introduced more like slp_node with its vectype for recording > the cost, the adjust_stmt_cost will be hit and plus the cost of vr2gpr now. > And then fail to vectorize due to cost value changes of vr2gpr from 0 to 2. > > That means we need to reconsider how to pass the cost value from the command > line eventually. > If we need to add more options for cost, shall we consider to introduce a > config file for all possible costs values? > It may look like a json file which contains sorts of cost num, instead of add > it separately. (may have minor discuss with kito last summer I bet.) For now I suggest we just go with a new param. As it's just for the testsuite it won't hurt. Another option would also be a CPU cost model (likewise just for testing) that has zero GPR <-> VR latency. Once a better option comes up we can easily get rid of both params again. -- Regards Robin
