On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 5:39 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> Hi Richi,
>
> Thanks for your review comments on this and some others!
>
> on 2023/6/30 19:37, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 4:07 AM Kewen Lin wrote:
> >>
> >> This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
> >
Hi Richi,
Thanks for your review comments on this and some others!
on 2023/6/30 19:37, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 4:07 AM Kewen Lin wrote:
>>
>> This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
>> which suggest structuring vectorizable_load to make costing
>> ne
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 4:07 AM Kewen Lin wrote:
>>
>> This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
>> which suggest structuring vectorizable_load to make costing
>> next to the transform, in order to make it easier to keep
>> costing and the transform in
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 4:07 AM Kewen Lin wrote:
>
> This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
> which suggest structuring vectorizable_load to make costing
> next to the transform, in order to make it easier to keep
> costing and the transform in sync. For now, it's a known
>
Hi,
I'd like to gentle ping this patch series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/621460.html
BR,
Kewen
on 2023/6/13 10:03, Kewen Lin via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
> which suggest structuring vectorizable_load to make cos
This patch series follows Richi's suggestion at the link [1],
which suggest structuring vectorizable_load to make costing
next to the transform, in order to make it easier to keep
costing and the transform in sync. For now, it's a known
issue that what we cost can be inconsistent with what we
tran
