he.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-05-30 17:50
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; linkw
Subject: Re: Re: decremnt IV patch create fails on PowerPC
On Tue, 30 May 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Ok.
>
> It seems that for this conditions:
>
>> No, I said the current scheme does sth along
>> do {
>>remain -= MIN (vf, remain);
>> } while (remain != 0);
>> and I suggest to instead do
>> do {
>>old_remain = remain;
>>len = MIN (vf, remain);
>>remain -= vf;
>> } while (old_remain >= vf);
>> basically since only the last
not familiar with SCEV and I am not sure how to do that SCEV can
analysis the decrement IV.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-05-30 17:50
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; linkw
Subject: Re: Re: decremnt IV patch create fails on PowerPC
O
Thanks.
>
>
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
> From: Richard Biener
> Date: 2023-05-30 17:22
> To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; linkw
> Subject: Re: Re: decremnt IV patch create fails on PowerPC
> On Fri, 26 May 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
Biener
Date: 2023-05-30 17:22
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; linkw
Subject: Re: Re: decremnt IV patch create fails on PowerPC
On Fri, 26 May 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Hi, Richi. Thanks for your analysis and helps.
>
> >> We could simp
On Fri, 26 May 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Hi, Richi. Thanks for your analysis and helps.
>
> >> We could simply retain the original
> >> incrementing IV for loop control and add the decrementing
> >> IV for computing LEN in addition to that and leave IVOPTs
> >> sorting out to eventually
Hi, Richi. Thanks for your analysis and helps.
>> We could simply retain the original
>> incrementing IV for loop control and add the decrementing
>> IV for computing LEN in addition to that and leave IVOPTs
>> sorting out to eventually merge them (or not).
I am not sure how to do that. Could you
