On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 13:49 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 13:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > Hmm. I don't like this patch or its general idea too much. Instead > > I'd like us to move more of the cost model detail to the target, giving > > it a chance to look at the whole loop before deciding on a cost. ISTR > > posting the overall idea at some point, but let me repeat it here instead > > of trying to find that e-mail. > > > > The basic interface of the cost model should be, in targetm.vectorize > > > > /* Tell the target to start cost analysis of a loop or a basic-block > > (if the loop argument is NULL). Returns an opaque pointer to > > target-private data. */ > > void *init_cost (struct loop *loop); > > > > /* Add cost for N vectorized-stmt-kind statements in vector_mode. */ > > void add_stmt_cost (void *data, unsigned n, > > vectorized-stmt-kind, > > enum machine_mode vector_mode); > > > > /* Tell the target to compute and return the cost of the accumulated > > statements and free any target-private data. */ > > unsigned finish_cost (void *data);
By the way, I don't see much point in passing the void *data around here. Too many levels of interfaces that we'd have to pass it around in the vectorizer, so it would just sit in a static variable. Might as well let the data be wholly private to the target. > > > > with eventually slightly different signatures for add_stmt_cost > > (like pass in the original scalar stmt?). > > > > It allows the target, at finish_cost time, to evaluate things like > > register pressure and resource utilization. > > > > Thanks, > > Richard.
