I don't want to seperate VSETVL PASS into 2 seperate PASS.
I want make everything cleaner.
Another example is VSETVL PASS can do the branch prediction:
https://godbolt.org/z/K44r98E5v
In function "f", you can see we put the hoist vsetvl from a more likely block
(i !=cond) outside the loop,
then
i
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-04-11 19:19
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
CC: jeffreyalaw; gcc-patches; kito.cheng; palmer
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix PR108279
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:19 AM juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
wrote:
>
> No, we can only pass "available" to LCM.
> Passing
ailable for both "vadd" and "vle32",
> so LCM will hoist "vsetvl e8,mf8,TU" outside the LOOP
> and remove all vsetvls inside the loop.
>
>
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
>
> From: Richard Biener
> Date: 2023-04-11 16:55
&
available for both "vadd" and "vle32",
so LCM will hoist "vsetvl e8,mf8,TU" outside the LOOP
and remove all vsetvls inside the loop.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-04-11 16:55
To: juzhe.zhong
CC: Jeff Law; gcc-patches; kito.cheng; palmer
Su
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 3:53 PM wrote:
>
> >> So fusion in this context is really about identifying cases where two
> >> configuration settings are equivalent and you "fuse" them together.
> >> Presumably this is only going to be possible when the vector insns are
> >> just doing data movement rath
>> So fusion in this context is really about identifying cases where two
>> configuration settings are equivalent and you "fuse" them together.
>> Presumably this is only going to be possible when the vector insns are
>> just doing data movement rather than actual computations?
>> If my understand
This point is seletected not because LCM but by Phase 3 (VL/VTYPE demand info
backward fusion and propogation) which
is I introduced into VSETVL PASS to enhance LCM && improve vsetvl instruction
performance.
This patch is to supress the Phase 3 too aggressive backward fusion and
propagation to
