Robin Dapp <rd...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> Not sure I've understood the series TBH, but is the npeel == vf / 2 >> there specifically for the "unknown number of peels" case? How do >> we distinguish that from the case in which the number of peels is >> known to be vf / 2 at compile time? Or have I missed the point >> completely? (probably yes, sorry!) > > Good point, that's not totally waterproof for future uses of > vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs (). Currently, however, only when > peeling for unknown alignment vf != 0 will be passed to it (and vf == 0 > for the known alignment case), so we can distinguish the cases.
Ah, makes sense now, thanks. Would you mind putting something like that last sentence in a comment? > In future, the whole vf/2 handling should be improved anyway since e.g. > it is hardcoded here as well as in tree-vect-loop.c. npeel = 0 also has > a double meaning, namely not peeling when peeling for known alignment > and peeling vf/2 iters when peeling for unknown alignment. Room for > improvement I guess :) Yeah :-) But thanks for the series, looks like a nice improvement. Richard
