This looks good to me. Just a couple of very minor cosmetic things:
[email protected] writes:
> @@ -753,17 +846,35 @@ vect_set_loop_condition_partial_vectors (class loop
> *loop,
> continue;
> }
>
> - /* See whether zero-based IV would ever generate all-false masks
> - or zero length before wrapping around. */
> - bool might_wrap_p = vect_rgroup_iv_might_wrap_p (loop_vinfo, rgc);
> -
> - /* Set up all controls for this group. */
> - test_ctrl = vect_set_loop_controls_directly (loop, loop_vinfo,
> - &preheader_seq,
> - &header_seq,
> - loop_cond_gsi, rgc,
> - niters, niters_skip,
> - might_wrap_p);
> + if (!LOOP_VINFO_USING_DECREMENTING_IV_P (loop_vinfo) || !iv_rgc
> + || (iv_rgc->max_nscalars_per_iter * iv_rgc->factor
> + != rgc->max_nscalars_per_iter * rgc->factor))
Coding style is to put each subcondition on a separate line when the
whole condition doesn't fit on a single line. So:
if (!LOOP_VINFO_USING_DECREMENTING_IV_P (loop_vinfo)
|| !iv_rgc
|| (iv_rgc->max_nscalars_per_iter * iv_rgc->factor
!= rgc->max_nscalars_per_iter * rgc->factor))
> @@ -2725,6 +2726,17 @@ start_over:
> && !vect_verify_loop_lens (loop_vinfo))
> LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
>
> + /* If we're vectorizing an loop that uses length "controls" and
s/an loop/a loop/ (Sorry for not noticing earlier.)
OK for trunk from my POV with those changes; no need to repost unless
your policies require it. Please give Richi a chance to comment too
though.
Thanks for your patience with the review process. The final result
seems pretty clean to me.
Richard
