Displaying 1 result from an estimated 1 matches for "int_umax".
Did you mean:
int_max
2015 May 06
2
[LLVMdev] [LoopVectorizer] Missed vectorization opportunities caused by sext/zext operations
For
void test0(unsigned short a, unsigned short * in, unsigned short * out) {
for (unsigned short w = 1; w < a - 1; w++) //this will never overflow
out[w] = in[w+7] * 2;
}
I think it will be sufficient to add a couple of new cases to
ScalarEvolution::HowManyLessThans --
zext(A) ult zext(B) == A ult B
sext(A) slt sext(B) == A slt B
Currently it bails out if it sees a non-add