Hi Richard,
on 2023/7/2 16:58, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Kewen Lin <li...@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>> @@ -9743,11 +9739,23 @@ vectorizable_load (vec_info *vinfo,
>> unsigned int n_groups = 0;
>> for (j = 0; j < ncopies; j++)
>> {
>> - if (nloads > 1)
>> + if (nloads > 1 && !costing_p)
>> vec_alloc (v, nloads);
>> gimple *new_stmt = NULL;
>> for (i = 0; i < nloads; i++)
>> {
>> + if (costing_p)
>> + {
>> + if (VECTOR_TYPE_P (ltype))
>> + vect_get_load_cost (vinfo, stmt_info, 1,
>> + alignment_support_scheme, misalignment,
>> + false, &inside_cost, nullptr, cost_vec,
>> + cost_vec, true);
>> + else
>> + inside_cost += record_stmt_cost (cost_vec, 1, scalar_load,
>> + stmt_info, 0, vect_body);
>> + continue;
>> + }
>
> Just a note that this might make life harder for AArch64 costing.
> Strided SLP loads are still equivalent to vector loads for AArch64,
> since they happen on the FPR/vector side even if they have integral
> modes.
>
> But I agree this is more accurate from a general target-independent POV,
> especially given the relatively coarse-grain costing enum. So I think
> that's just something AArch64 will need to account for.
Sorry for the inconvenience. Hope accounting for it with target hook on
vect costing isn't very complicated.
BR,
Kewen
