MacDue wrote:

> Do the ll tests represent the expected input IR? If yes then I think this 
> would be better implemented as an IR canonicalisation.

I have already implemented that, but it's pretty unlikely it'd be accepted. In 
the past I've been told that folding to the `vector.reduce.*` intrinsics is 
less canonical, as more combines/optimizations understand the scalar form. 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/181162
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

Reply via email to