On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 05:41:02PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> on 2023/11/20 16:56, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 08:24:35AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> I wouldn't expose the "fake" larger modes to the vectorizer but rather
> >> adjust m_suggested_unroll_factor (which you
on 2023/11/20 16:56, Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 08:24:35AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I wouldn't expose the "fake" larger modes to the vectorizer but rather
>> adjust m_suggested_unroll_factor (which you already do to some extent).
>
> Thanks. I figure I first need to
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:56 AM Michael Meissner wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 08:24:35AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > I wouldn't expose the "fake" larger modes to the vectorizer but rather
> > adjust m_suggested_unroll_factor (which you already do to some extent).
>
> Thanks. I figure I
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 08:24:35AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wouldn't expose the "fake" larger modes to the vectorizer but rather
> adjust m_suggested_unroll_factor (which you already do to some extent).
Thanks. I figure I first need to fix the shuffle byes issue first and get a
clean test
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 5:19 AM Michael Meissner wrote:
>
> This is simiilar to the patches on November 10th.
>
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636077.html
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636078.html
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/
This is simiilar to the patches on November 10th.
* https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636077.html
* https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636078.html
* https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636083.html
* https://gcc.
