[LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2? (original) (raw)
Hal Finkel hfinkel at anl.gov
Thu Oct 16 11:38:07 PDT 2014
- Previous message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2?
- Next message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com> To: "Zinovy Nis" <zinovy.nis at gmail.com> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "James Molloy" <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 1:21:19 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2?
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Zinovy Nis < zinovy.nis at gmail.com > wrote: Seems that adding -extra-vectorizer-passes doesn't help to vectorizer in my case. LoopRotation re-run does nothing. Can you reduce this to a test case you can share?
He had posted one earlier here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20141006/238660.html (Arnold had posted some analysis here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20141006/239144.html - which I imagine you saw)
-Hal
-- Hal Finkel Assistant Computational Scientist Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory
- Previous message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2?
- Next message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Should we have (something like) -extra-vectorizer-passes in -O2?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]