>> I don't think it's that simple. On some uarchs vsetvls are nearly free >>while on others they can be fairly expensive. It's not clear (to me) >>yet if one approach or the other is going to be the more common.
That's uarch dependent which is not the stuff I am talking about. What's I want to say is that this patch breaks those testcases I added for VSETVL PASS testing. And those testcases are uarch independent. juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Jeff Law Date: 2024-02-27 23:22 To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Robin Dapp; Edwin Lu; gcc-patches CC: gnu-toolchain; pan2.li Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Update test expectancies with recent scheduler change On 2/26/24 18:21, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote: > If the scheduling model increases the vsetvls, we shouldn't set it as > default scheduling model I don't think it's that simple. On some uarchs vsetvls are nearly free while on others they can be fairly expensive. It's not clear (to me) yet if one approach or the other is going to be the more common. jeff
