================
@@ -5546,12 +5574,17 @@ void LoopVectorizationPlanner::plan(ElementCount
UserVF, unsigned UserIC,
"VF needs to be a power of two");
// Collect the instructions (and their associated costs) that will be
more
// profitable to scalarize.
- CM.collectNonVectorizedAndSetWideningDecisions(UserVF);
+ for_each(EnabledCMs, [&](auto *CurrentCM) {
+ CurrentCM->collectNonVectorizedAndSetWideningDecisions(UserVF);
+ });
ElementCount EpilogueUserVF =
ElementCount::getFixed(EpilogueVectorizationForceVF);
if (EpilogueUserVF.isVector() &&
ElementCount::isKnownLT(EpilogueUserVF, UserVF)) {
- CM.collectNonVectorizedAndSetWideningDecisions(EpilogueUserVF);
+ for_each(EnabledCMs, [&](auto *CurrentCM) {
+ CurrentCM->collectNonVectorizedAndSetWideningDecisions(
+ EpilogueUserVF);
+ });
----------------
hassnaaHamdi wrote:
No, we don't need it, but I want to keep it as it is to keep the current logic
working even if I enabled the new tail-folding policy until I can eventually
emit tail-folded epilogue. But I'm also not sure if this thought is correct or
not.
I will add a TODO to remove it once we complete the feature. what do you think ?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/202820
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
