Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
2017-Jun-29 22:42 UTC
[llvm-dev] Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)
If you don't use BBVectorize at all, you can ignore this. Hal suggested this in a thread in 2014: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-November/079091.html None objected then, and I don't think any new uses have arisen so I plan to just remove it. It is causing maintenance burden, complexity, and is a set of features I'd rather not port to the new PM. Just an FYI email to folks so they aren't confused when the patches land. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170629/ee706495/attachment.html>
Hal Finkel via llvm-dev
2017-Jun-29 22:49 UTC
[llvm-dev] Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)
On 06/29/2017 05:42 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:> If you don't use BBVectorize at all, you can ignore this. > > Hal suggested this in a thread in 2014: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-November/079091.html > > None objected then, and I don't think any new uses have arisen so I > plan to just remove it. It is causing maintenance burden, complexity, > and is a set of features I'd rather not port to the new PM.Thanks, Chandler. Indeed, I've not seen any "-fslp-vectorize-aggressive makes my code faster" reports in a long time. -Hal> > Just an FYI email to folks so they aren't confused when the patches land.-- Hal Finkel Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory
Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
2017-Jun-30 22:58 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> If you don't use BBVectorize at all, you can ignore this. > > Hal suggested this in a thread in 2014: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-November/079091.html > > None objected then, and I don't think any new uses have arisen so I plan to > just remove it. It is causing maintenance burden, complexity, and is a set > of features I'd rather not port to the new PM. > > Just an FYI email to folks so they aren't confused when the patches land.Maybe worth mentioning in the release notes?
Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
2017-Jul-01 01:32 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)
Already added in the commit (I think) On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:58 PM Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote:> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > If you don't use BBVectorize at all, you can ignore this. > > > > Hal suggested this in a thread in 2014: > > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-November/079091.html > > > > None objected then, and I don't think any new uses have arisen so I plan > to > > just remove it. It is causing maintenance burden, complexity, and is a > set > > of features I'd rather not port to the new PM. > > > > Just an FYI email to folks so they aren't confused when the patches land. > > Maybe worth mentioning in the release notes? >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170701/d2a9a7cd/attachment.html>
Possibly Parallel Threads
- [cfe-dev] Just a quick heads up -- removing BBVectorize from LLVM (and Clang)
- [LLVMdev] [RFC] Removing BBVectorize?
- [LLVMdev] How to get debug dump of candidate pairs selected in BBVectorizer?
- [LLVMdev] Code Ownership - BBVectorize
- [LLVMdev] Code Ownership - BBVectorize